X Close

Why the Left needs ‘institutional racism’ Their dogmatic approach makes sensible analysis impossible

A pupil in East London (Photo by DANIEL LEAL-OLIVAS/AFP via Getty Images)

A pupil in East London (Photo by DANIEL LEAL-OLIVAS/AFP via Getty Images)


April 1, 2021   4 mins

The law of the instrument — or “Maslow’s hammer”, as it is sometimes known — has become an indispensable tool for negotiating the current world. It holds, as Abraham Maslow said in 1966, that “it is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail”.

In recent decades, this law has held firm nowhere so much as in the business of “race relations”, where one hammer in particular has been on very public display: the casual accusation of “racism”. Allegations of racism have for decades been among the most serious accusations that can be made against a person; likewise, since the publication of the Macpherson report into the murder of Stephen Lawrence, an allegation of “institutional racism” has been the most serious accusation that can be made against an organisation.

With this in mind, it was perhaps inevitable that, by virtue of their potency, such accusations would end up being wielded as a substitute for evidence. And so for years, to set up an investigation into an institution on matters to do with race was to pre-ordain the outcome: the institution always had to be found guilty.

So the list of institutions that have been subjected to accusations of institutional racism has come to encompass almost every corner of British public life. The Church of England has been described as “institutionally racist” by no less a figure than the Archbishop of Canterbury. It is in good company, along with the The National Trust and the entire “British countryside”.

Of course, the problem with these accusations is not just their inaccuracy or predictability. The problem is that they distract from any genuine, meaningful attempts to investigate the complex issues of race in Britain. It is, therefore, fortunate that a new report ordered by the British government following the Black Lives Matter protests last year has shown it is possible to buck this trend.

Indeed, the report of the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities, published yesterday, is proof that we can do without Maslow’s hammer. Its findings are nuanced and well-researched; it concludes that while Britain is not an entirely “post-racial” society, the success of much of the ethnic minority population “should be regarded as a model for other white-majority countries”. It also details how certain ethnic minorities are driving high educational achievement for children, and that this in turn is creating fairer and more diverse workplaces.

All in all, despite its acknowledgement that more work needs to be done, the report paints an encouraging portrait of race relations in Britain. And yet, predictably, this news has not gone down well in all quarters. While conceding that he had not yet read the report, Labour leader Keir Starmer said that he found it “disappointing”, because there is still “a reluctance to accept that that’s structural”. For his part, Starmer has invested heavily in the “racism is institutional” narrative, and so of course it must be deeply unsatisfying for someone to suggest that any remaining issues cannot simply be solved by, for instance, “taking the knee”.

The same applies to Rehana Azam, the national secretary of the GMB trade union. Before the report was even released, she did what any campaigning union leader might be expected to do. Fulsomely quoted in the headline of a Guardian report, and elsewhere, Azam managed to accuse the Commission’s findings of “gaslighting” and “ignoring black and ethnic minority workers’s worries and concerns”, of being “cynical”, “irresponsible”, “immoral” and more. “Institutional racism exists,” said Azam, and is “the lived experience of millions of black and ethnic minority workers”. Her evidence? That ethnic minorities are dying in greater numbers from Covid.

Her allegation, like the question of educational attainment, is a fine example of the problem of the hammer approach. For if it is the case that specific demographics are disproportionately likely to die from Covid, then there might be a variety of reasons for that. It could have something to do with underlying health conditions in those communities; or with the type of jobs members of that community disproportionately perform; or even with their household arrangements and social habits. Members of Britain’s Orthodox community, for example, have been accused of flouting lockdown rules by continuing with mass-participation events. If the statistics show a larger uptick in Covid-related deaths in the Orthodox community, then might such social factors be at least a part of the explanation? The answer, of course, is “yes”.

But if you have only one tool — and that tool is “institutional racism” — that can never be the case. If you have already decided on the explanation for the problem, any attempt at sensible analysis is impossible.

Nowhere are the effects of this doctrinaire approach more pernicious than in the area of educational attainment. In the past, differentials in educational attainment were put down by some to genetic factors; the outperformance of a particular racial group was explained by making reference to the genetic superiority of one group over another. For reasons to do with inaccuracy as much as unpalatability, this explanation has declined in popularity. But if someone today were to enter a discussion wielding the hammer of genetic traits, we would all be able to see what they were doing: rather than being interesting in discussion, their conclusion had already been decided.

Today, with its emphasis on “institutional racism”, a new all-purpose tool has come into existence. But as anyone can see from the evidence provided in the Commission’s report, certain groups do outperform other groups — but this doesn’t necessarily point to “racism”. It notes, for instance, that “the average GCSE Attainment 8 score for Indian, Bangladeshi and Black African pupils were above the White British average”. It is the same with the issue of an alleged “pay gap” between ethnic minorities and the white majority population. The Commission’s report says that this pay gap did exist, but that it has shrunk to 2.3%. It further concludes that in 2019, among the under 30s, there was no significant pay gap between any ethnic minority group and the white majority in work.

This is in line with what a range of sociologists and commentators have tried to point to in recent years: namely, that where disparities do still exist in Britain, they might be explained by a whole range of factors, including social class and family structure. As the Commission concludes, “some of the disparities we examined, which some attribute to racial discrimination, often do not have their origins in racism”. And so it’s no wonder that so many self-proclaimed “progressives” have responded to the report with such fury. After all, the one tool that they have wielded to solve every problem, both real and imaginary, is in the process of being prised carefully from their hands.


Douglas Murray is an author and journalist.

DouglasKMurray

Join the discussion


Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber


To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.

Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

407 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Paul Blakemore
Paul Blakemore
3 years ago

The more I read of Dr Tony Sewell’s report the more impressed I am. The authors write: ”Our views were formed by growing up in the 1970s and 1980s. And our experience has taught us that you do not pass on the baton of progress by cleaving to a fatalistic account that insists nothing has changed. And nor do you move forward by importing bleak new theories about race that insist on accentuating our differences. It is closer contact, mutual understanding across ethnic groups and a shared commitment to equal opportunities that has contributed to the progress we have made”. I suppose as someone who also grew up in the 70s and 80s I find it sad that the tremendous progress that has been made is ignored by today’s ‘social justice warriors’. Terrific stuff. Also the report’s conclusion that factors such as family structure, class, socio-economic background, culture and religion have a greater ”impact on life chances than the existence of racism”… To many here it is simple common sense: but it’s like a bomb planted under the entire ‘woke’ position on race.

Simon Denis
Simon Denis
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul Blakemore

Intellectually, it is certainly a bomb; politically it is no more than a small grenade, thanks to the left wing echo chamber which calls itself “journalism”. And because much of the influential, metropolitan left now hunkers down in a concrete bunker of totalitarian certitude, they won’t feel it at all. They’ve invested too much in nonsense, formed too many stupid habits of mind, suppressed free enquiry and generous laughter for too long to be rescued with facts and figures. In short, we have raised a barbarous, ignorant, angry generation. All the more reason, then, to act as fast and as ruthlessly as possible to deprive this generation of power for as long as we can. And in the meantime we should strip back the law, cut down the so-called “universities” and shrink the propaganda / surveillance state to minimal proportions. But Johnson is scarcely man enough to speak, let alone act.

Starry Gordon
Starry Gordon
3 years ago
Reply to  Simon Denis

Intellectually, it is certainly a bomb; politically it is no more than a small grenade, thanks to the left wing echo chamber which calls itself “journalism”.

I think you’re giving far too much credit to the powers of name-calling. I’ve been on the Net a long time; in its early days, I started compiling a list of epithets applied to me, of which I’m sure ‘racist’ must have been near the top. But, like ‘fascist’ or ‘liberal’ or ‘feminist’, the word has been used so hard it doesn’t mean much of anything any more. One can’t help wondering, then, why people take it so seriously and get so excited about it. Can it be that they suspect themselves of secret sin? What do they think it means, if anything? It’s hard to tell.
Most of you don’t seem to know what ‘Left’ and its derivatives mean, either, or used to mean, but it doesn’t seem to pose as much of a problem. I can tell you, though, that if you keep throwing it around mindlessly you wear it out, too.

Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago
Reply to  Starry Gordon

“Most of you don’t seem to know what X means”
Um, I think usually it’s better to just say your opinion of what x means, and not say “I know, but you don’t…understandably it annoys people when others do that :p Having said that I like that you chat and have ideas… 🙂
In this case Left (classic liberal) means this to me, meaning less government is better…But to complicate it I also believe in a safetynet- for a short amount of time, so people can get out of trouble, if no family or friends can help, and free healthcare and if possible education – although that horse has galloped) But as you can see trying to put people into boxes with labels is pretty hard…and probably of little worth to do so.
I’m a very strong believer in human rights and equality based on our humanity (not sex, race or religion)
Progressive left means undermining human rights to delegate rights based on group membership to categories….To me this is very like apartheid. and not a path worth pursuing in the long run.
The greatest inequalities are usually government mandated through policy, through “special privileges” Because with everyday people we can negotiate around inequality. If its government mandated not so!

Last edited 3 years ago by Natalija Svobodné
Don Gaughan
Don Gaughan
3 years ago
Reply to  Starry Gordon

A Pyschology Today article quoted a study which revealed conservatives are far more certain of their views than liberals are.
Behind the facade of certainty of monopoly of truth and moral superiority, there is hidden inner sparks of doubt and conflict .
The bizzarre emotional response to outside dissent and thr vigorous suppresion of any and all dissent seems to be the behaviour of a posturing tyrant with insecurity of their dogma beliefs they are forcefully imposing on others and the entire western civilisation.

Last edited 3 years ago by Don Gaughan
Hilary Tait
Hilary Tait
3 years ago
Reply to  Don Gaughan

I put my own people before any other race or ethnic group. I have no inner spark of doubt or conflict. Multi-culturalism is imposed on me, and the entire western civilization, which will cease to exist at some point in the future. That’s nice that Western countries can provide a home for everybody. Which countries, apart from the West, are following a similar policy?

Dan Martin
Dan Martin
3 years ago
Reply to  Hilary Tait

Who are “your” people? Those who are genetically closer to you than others? Or those who are ideologically closer to you than others? I find this comment not only disgusting, but baffling. If those who are in your ethnic group or race have diametrically opposed political views to you, are you saying they are more your people than those who look different but share the same beliefs?

Hilary Tait
Hilary Tait
3 years ago
Reply to  Dan Martin

Be baffled no longer! My people are the British, and more widely, the Europeans, so yes, those who are genetically closest to me. You find the world disgusting, because that is how the non-Western world thinks too – proof here:
How racial groups rate each other (ljzigerell.com)
I love my own children more than other peoples’ too, even though they’re not the “best” by any measurable standard. They’re mine.

Lee Jones
Lee Jones
3 years ago
Reply to  Hilary Tait

You have captured the very essence of identitarian philosophy…

Cheryl Jones
Cheryl Jones
3 years ago
Reply to  Lee Jones

I would say that it is the most fundamental of human philosophies. Denying the hard wired propensity for humans to be tribal and to show in-group preference, especially kin relationships, is naive and flies in the face of evolutionary reality. I am actually proud that recent years have enabled some progress in that area to be more inclusive and open – but it is fragile indeed.

kathleen carr
kathleen carr
3 years ago
Reply to  Don Gaughan

Pyschologists and councillors have said for years that parents who constantly criticise their children are wrong as it creates a ‘give a dog a bad name syndrome’. The critics who don’t care for this report seem to wish to spread a virtual mass criticism-see interesting response by MP Clive Lewis

htm1958
htm1958
3 years ago
Reply to  Starry Gordon

Agree. When I am called a racist, because I say that there are differences between various groups of people, then so be it, and I am a racist. Differences in colour are very visible, other less visible differences (character, intelligence, social) also exist. It is only wrong to treat groups differently legally or socially because of these differences.

george_zoe
george_zoe
3 years ago
Reply to  Starry Gordon

The repercussions of being described as racist are far worse and very serious.

Dan Martin
Dan Martin
3 years ago
Reply to  Starry Gordon

“Left” is a descriptive label, not a pejorative. There is no equivalence between me labeling a person as a member of the Left and him labeling me as a racist or fascist.

Lee Jones
Lee Jones
3 years ago
Reply to  Starry Gordon

Or can it be that some people are so enamoured by their own opinions and feelings that they have become desensitised to the fact that others might have them too.

Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago
Reply to  Simon Denis

Thank goodness the majority of people from most ethnicities probably are more fair minded than the media and academia! Sure, it makes most people at odds with the Militant Activists, Government and Media – But we can vote and not support newspapers!
Like you I’m tempted to defund universities, and I am certainly keen to see them sued for human rights abuses! All students deserve a non hostile environment to learn as equals, in a respectful and nurturing atmosphere.
I think the main task now as everyday people (the media won’t do it, or the schools) is to educate people and share facts that rebut bad arguments with facts. and really get the public talking and thinking. Not just reacting to the emotion of arguments without understanding our own history. And really our historical understanding of slavery is ridiculous and entirely eurocentric.(mostly for ideological reasons)But this has to stop. Slavery was worldwide and culture wide – So no student should have the right to feel virtuous or as if their culture was an innocent, all the while attacking others…It should be a moment to appreciate human rights and understand the pitfall of unmitigated power over others. something no culture is blameless in.
Thomas Sowell is my favorite so far, and rebuts fully the idea of slavery as a white institution or in anyway related to Racism. We aren’t perfect, but on the history of slavery we turned the corner and improved lives for millions world-wide including cultures that were resistant to abolishing it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWrfjUzYvPo

Gillian Johnson
Gillian Johnson
3 years ago

Thank you for the link to the excerpt read from Thomas Sowell’s book.

Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago

Share the link lots <3 The more people that know history the better!

Dennis Lewis
Dennis Lewis
3 years ago

Well said, Natalija, with this and your comment above in response to Starry Gordon. It’s good to see that more people are discovering the work of Thomas Sowell.

Ben Morris
Ben Morris
3 years ago
Reply to  Simon Denis

You think THIS is not an echo chamber? And you want to deprive “this generation” of power? Which generation is that? This really is a place of frothing nonsense, and I nominate you a grade one frother.

Simon Denis
Simon Denis
3 years ago
Reply to  Ben Morris

Mindless abuse from the left. Plus ca change…

Tobye Pierce
Tobye Pierce
3 years ago
Reply to  Simon Denis

He made your point rather well, I think.

Paul Blakemore
Paul Blakemore
3 years ago
Reply to  Ben Morris

But what do you think about Douglas Murray’s article? Do you refute the conclusions reached by the report of the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities? On what basis precisely? Below you describe it as ”self-congratulatory”. Do you not think amazing progress has been made since you were a teenager? Do you disagree with its recommendations for tackling the racism that it clearly acknowledges does exist?

Last edited 3 years ago by Paul Blakemore
Hilary Tait
Hilary Tait
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul Blakemore

Who cares whether Britons are racist or not? I put my own people first. I acknowledge and embrace my “racism” and simply don’t care.

Paul Blakemore
Paul Blakemore
3 years ago
Reply to  Hilary Tait

That’s your choice, but if different ‘races’ are all taking a pop at each other cities in Britain and elsewhere will soon become war zones; though I acknowledge that some US cities seem to have arrived there already.
The concept of ‘my own people’ is an interesting one too: why is that determined by skin colour? I would generally be classified as ‘white’ I expect, though I’ve never felt myself to be particularly white. I grew up with people of other ‘races’ that were more ‘my own people’ than many of the white folk I encountered.

Hilary Tait
Hilary Tait
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul Blakemore

I certainly don’t advocate “taking a pop” at anyone because of their race. My own parents didn’t take a pop at anyone, they simply left (Birmingham) in 1968 as they saw the writing on the wall for the indigenous people. They simply no longer felt at home. They hated no one, nor do I. However, no previously Western country is left untouched by the multi-culture project, and we will fast run out of places to retreat to. With birth rates in our boots, and our economies based on a seemingly endless increase of consumers, supplied by immigration and the offspring of immigrants, we will end up as ethnic minorities feeling as if we are living in a foreign country. Although you consider that other races are like, or even more like, your own people, I can assure you that this feeling is not reciprocated (yes, I can supply evidence of this if required). Skin colour is just one of the many indicators of race – you are suggesting that mere skin colour is the only difference – not so. Human nature is tribal – this ensures the survival of the group. Darwin called this “group selection”, while Aristotle referred to this blood bond as “Philia”, noting that multi-ethnic societies were fragmented and chaotic. As Westerners have rejected natural group selection, they will eventually die out/be absorbed into the various ethnicities. The multi-culture that then occupies those spaces will slug it out amongst themselves for a dominant group – you’re starting to see this already in the USA, as you pointed out, but also in Britain. We will only see so much before the end of our respective lifespans. I find this process horrifying for my people, but admit amusement when the multi-culture go at it hammer and tongs. Light multi-cultural fuse and stand well back!

Alex Delszsen
Alex Delszsen
3 years ago
Reply to  Hilary Tait

and you lose cultural diversity, meaning how one society feels different and new from another.
Americans are used to come-ons from men in public, or intimidation in public areas. I was in Germany before the great migration, and German men might let their eyes wander with the slightest look to the side if an amazingly beautiful woman walked by. By 2019, getting harassed by the newest migrants was a too common experience.
when people do not come all at once, they try to fit in with the culture already living there. Now there were lots of men from loverboy cultures.
the nosedive for women feeling safe in the streets sadly nosedived.
that German hard to tell when they were flirting vibe is there, but the tone of public behavior is now new, and sadly, new visitors will accept as normal.

Last edited 3 years ago by Alex Delszsen
Lee Jones
Lee Jones
3 years ago
Reply to  Hilary Tait

But, if you believe in your own culture and community and also participate in it, it will not die out, it will endure. If you only see your community and culture as merely something that is different from ‘them’ it will. Having a distinct culture does not mean that you cannot have meaningful (positive) relations with other cultures. Surety that proximity with other cultures will destroy your own portrays a rather dismal mindset. It almost sounds like you are accepting it is not robust enough to survive any ‘contamination’. Which is, I think, not really a reflection of life in the U.K., a country that historically has cultures that differ from village to village, town to town, nation to nation etc. and yet still in almost a thousand years only had one civil war predicated on ideology. I think you sell your culture short…

Last edited 3 years ago by Lee Jones
Ted Ditchburn
Ted Ditchburn
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul Blakemore

I think the Critical Race Theory/white fragility thing is deeply unhelpful, as is the connected idea that progress has not been made.
I am glad the recent report seemed to get back to common-sense.
I think multiculturalism has been a disaster: Respect other cultures and people for sure, but many people who came here, from Uganda Asians onward came because they were often wanting to getaway from a culture of intolerance, repression, quashed opportunity, inequality TO the UK.
The funniest moments on the old Question Time would always come when a recent immigrant asked their opinion on this or that, would start spouting things that were more *Gammon* in the eyes of ‘progressive’ left-wingers than anything said by the conservatives in the audience or on the panel..

Jos Haynes
Jos Haynes
3 years ago
Reply to  Hilary Tait

There are a lot of white people who are absolutely horrific and a lot of darker skinned peiple who are absolutely charming. How can you group your friends on the basis of skin colour? Perhaps you are confusing race and culture?

Last edited 3 years ago by Jos Haynes
David Morley
David Morley
3 years ago
Reply to  Ben Morris

Yes, it is becoming a bit of an echo chamber, though most people still back up there positions with argument and sometimes evidence. How do we avoid that? It seems to be everywhere. And arguably there is now a bit of an Unherd herd.
I’d be more than happy to see some opposing arguments well made, and indeed, try to do so myself on occasion. Go for it.

Jeff Carr
Jeff Carr
3 years ago
Reply to  Simon Denis

I read that 80% of ‘tweets’ are produced by 2% of the population. Now there is a minority echo chamber if ever there was one. Yet the media seem to think it is representative of public opinion.

Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeff Carr

Touché I read that 80% of laws are produced by 2% of the population, Yet the media seem to think it is representative of public opinion?
It’s possible i’m being facetious though ;P It happens.

Last edited 3 years ago by Natalija Svobodné
Jeff Carr
Jeff Carr
3 years ago

🙂 😉 And the laws are adjudicated by an even smaller proportion of the population.

Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeff Carr

hehe we have to laugh so we dont cry 😛

Jos Haynes
Jos Haynes
3 years ago

What does this -:P – mean?

Jon Redman
Jon Redman
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul Blakemore

Has anyone called Tony Sewell an “Uncle Tom” yet? It can’t be long coming.

David B
David B
3 years ago
Reply to  Jon Redman

I’ve seen it multiple times on cesspits such as Reddit.

Paul Blakemore
Paul Blakemore
3 years ago
Reply to  Jon Redman

I was just reading Matthew Syed in The Sunday Times. He mentions that Priyamvada Gopal has compared Sewell to Goebbels, while Labour MP Clive Lewis ”tweeted a picture of a Ku Klux Klan grand wizard standing before a burning cross with the words #RaceReport”.
The left are just so utterly vile… The only good thing being I suppose that it repels most ordinary, decent people and prevents them voting the left into power.

Chris Scott
Chris Scott
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul Blakemore

And as usual it’s been denounced by almost every commentator in the Guardian. According to HalimaBegum under the headline The verdict on the Sewell report into racial disparity, she says ‘…[it] is nothing short of an insult.’ Kalwant Bhopal Bhopal basically says the report is a ‘whitewash’. Predictable. Of course, it doesn’t fit the narrative they’re pushing. I often wonder if it’s worth reading the Guardian; I can guess what they’re going to write before I get out of bed in the morning.

Last edited 3 years ago by Chris Scott
clem alford
clem alford
3 years ago
Reply to  Chris Scott

Yes, I got canceled in the comments section of the Independent today. So much for free speech and exchamnge of ideas.

Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago
Reply to  Chris Scott

“I often wonder if it’s worth reading the Guardian”
I finally blocked them on my computer – No clicks! No Advertising, No income, It’s the best I can do…After all there are better more middle of the line newspapers and I got tired of their incredibly lopsided coverage, and can’t think of any other way to “punish” them.
It’s a shame though since I believe in free speech…but since my clicks fund them… what else can a person do
I wish there was an outside moderation process… for fact checking and bias that stamped articles with a moderated rating and added the missing arguments to highlight gaps in reporter coverage, and logical fallacies on every website! Just like a restaurant to have a AAA+ rating. There’s more safety checks about what we put in our stomachs than what we put in out heads. The food for our minds should also be good and well balanced.
If wishes were fishes…

Last edited 3 years ago by Natalija Svobodné
Robin Lambert
Robin Lambert
3 years ago

They are NOT on My Microsoft News I blocked them & The so called Independent,with its Woke Sanctomoniuos tone..Guardian founded by Cotton Magnate & Slave supporter John Edward Taylor

Don Gaughan
Don Gaughan
3 years ago

The Guardian is a one sided leftist extremist propaganda political pamphlet.
However, its interesting to see the mindset descending into myopic dementia ,and to understand the voice of the progressive tyranny, in order to dispute it, defeat it and liberate the free democracies from it.

Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago
Reply to  Don Gaughan

Oh I used to like communism, so I’ve heard alllll of Guardians arguments before… So I’m quite familiar with both sides of the arguments ;P They aren’t original enough to come up with anything more interesting. Just more of the same old (as if nothing ever actually got better)… No I’m happier without them. I enjoy good long format nuanced news…More in the center neither right or left – “its-not-good-to-trust either-so-lets-hear-it-all” kind of news!
hehe but good luck you have more patience than I!

Last edited 3 years ago by Natalija Svobodné
Fraser Bailey
Fraser Bailey
3 years ago

Yes, I simply stopped even going to the Guardian site some time ago. In doing so you only give them clicks and, indirectly, a tiny bit of cash. I am aware that they do still have a couple of good writers, but I just can’t bring myself to go there – and I was someone who was still buying the printed edition until around 2010.

Jim Gerlach
Jim Gerlach
3 years ago

The Guardian is left?!? Sorry, across the pond it’s what I read to get a sense of balance. I always thought it was center-right. When the items on your menu are Fox News on one side and NY Times/CNN on the other, The Guardian is quite refreshing.

Jos Haynes
Jos Haynes
3 years ago
Reply to  Jim Gerlach

You have your own Guardian – The New York Times. Both ludicrous

Dennis Lewis
Dennis Lewis
3 years ago
Reply to  Jim Gerlach

Jim, come on! You’re surprised to discover that the Guardian is considered by many to be a leftist rag? I mean, come on, mate. Do you carefully read their articles?

Jayne Lago
Jayne Lago
3 years ago
Reply to  Chris Scott

So true Chris, but it doesn’t just belong to the Guardian. You can add all of mainstream TV news channels (bring on GB news) and Question Time, that other immensely predictable programme. Panorama and now we have the kids in school (Pimlico Academy) ALL singing from the same hymn sheet! Who wants to bet there will be protests all around the country demanding the head of Tony Sewell and others! Not sure how all the leftie activists are going to be able to attend all these ‘perfectly well behaved protests’ when there will be so many!

julian.davies1961
julian.davies1961
3 years ago
Reply to  Chris Scott

The G has definitely got worse over the years. I think one still needs to read it, but, like listening to the BBC, one learns to anticipate the message, and to “aim off” accordingly.

Alex Mitchell
Alex Mitchell
3 years ago

The response from the race hustlers was all too predictable. Facts be damned, we think it’s there so it must be. Of course, this makes them look in all the wrong places for their solutions, which does more harm than good.
Viewing from overseas it doesn’t seem like the uk government is exactly firing on all cylinders, but their resistance to unfettered wokeness is to be applauded.

James Rowlands
James Rowlands
3 years ago
Reply to  Alex Mitchell

Alex, such a quaint old fashioned notion that facts still trump feelings.

Fraser Bailey
Fraser Bailey
3 years ago
Reply to  James Rowlands

Well it’s more a case of facts not being allowed to trump sinecures and salaries. The feelings are faked because without race to grift off these people would have to do something useful or productive, and they would not be able or willing to do that.

Allie McBeth
Allie McBeth
3 years ago
Reply to  Fraser Bailey

Yes, there’s a whole raft of grifters in the race industry, not about to lose their ‘marks’ that easily.

Ben Morris
Ben Morris
3 years ago
Reply to  Allie McBeth

Name ten.

Chris Scott
Chris Scott
3 years ago
Reply to  Ben Morris

Robin diAngelo, BBC (and not the Russian one), NYT, The Guardian, The Independent, Diane Abbott, Mr and Mrs Smug aka Los Merkle’s, HalimaBegum, Remi Joseph-Salisbury, Afua Hirsch (who spends time trashing the UK at every opportunity) and Priyamvada Gopel. As I’ve said before, whilst there is undoubtedly racism, these people are being a little disingenuous of their criticism of the UK when all you have to do is step out of the UK and see blatant in-your-face racism that I’ve experienced in the US, continental Europe and South American. The UK may not be perfect but it is bending over backwards to accommodate people from very different cultures.

Last edited 3 years ago by Chris Scott
Annette Kralendijk
Annette Kralendijk
3 years ago
Reply to  Ben Morris

Robin DiAngelo (author of White Fragility)
Regina Jackson and Sairo Rao (own a business called Race to Dinner where White people pay to attend dinners at which they are berated by the two)
Al Sharpton
Meghan and Harry Windsor
Jesse Jackson
Barack and Michelle Obama
Jussie Smollett (staged a fake hate crime)
Nathan Phillips (the Covington kids Native American who claimed he was the victim until video showed he was the aggressor)
That’s 11 and that’s just off the top of my head. There are hundreds of racial hate crime hoaxes in the US, going all the way back to Tawana Brawley. And she makes 12.

Dennis Lewis
Dennis Lewis
3 years ago

Your list is generally accurate, but I disagree with you on the Obamas. Though I’m not a fan, I don’t believe that they’re race grifters. But the others on your list, most definitely. I checked out Race to Dinner online, and I couldn’t believe it! There are people who actually pay thousands of dollars to attend dinners where they have to sit and listen to a couple of women tell them about how racist they are. I’m surprised that you didn’t mention Ibram X. Kendi, a particularly astute grifter who made it to Time’s 100 Most Influential People list. His toxic influence has now spread from academia to the corporate world.

Don Gaughan
Don Gaughan
3 years ago
Reply to  Ben Morris

Woke Ben got a fact based answer to his rhetorical question,and note how he ” responds”.

Fraser Bailey
Fraser Bailey
3 years ago
Reply to  Ben Morris

There are at least 10 at the Guardian alone. And hundreds at the BBC.

Starry Gordon
Starry Gordon
3 years ago
Reply to  Fraser Bailey

There is always a basis for grifting.

Tom Fox
Tom Fox
3 years ago
Reply to  James Rowlands

You should have heard Lord Woolley on the Today Programme this morning. Pure anecdote and no challenge from the interviewer.

David B
David B
3 years ago
Reply to  Tom Fox

The MSM has been somewhat co-opted sadly.

Tobye Pierce
Tobye Pierce
3 years ago
Reply to  David B

Somewhat? Understatement at it’s best! Sad though.

David Brown
David Brown
3 years ago
Reply to  Tom Fox

The BBC is little more than the broadcast wing of The Guardian, with the main difference being that if we want to watch any television at all, we have to fund it.

Grant Evans
Grant Evans
3 years ago
Reply to  David Brown

Nonsense.What you mean is neither are explicitly right wing………the only media alternatives

Paul Mayes
Paul Mayes
3 years ago
Reply to  Alex Mitchell

I think the UK govt is firing on more cylinders than many other World govts in these difficult times.

David Morley
David Morley
3 years ago
Reply to  Alex Mitchell

The response from the race hustlers was all too predictable. Facts be damned, we think it’s there so it must be. 

It won’t change dogmatic minds. Nothing does. But it will change the space in which they are arguing. Claims will need to be backed up, not simply asserted. And their positions will look more nakedly ideological.
Who will be first to claim that this report only goes to show how deeply racist the U.K. is?

Fraser Bailey
Fraser Bailey
3 years ago
Reply to  David Morley

My money is on Afua Hirsch.

Eleanor Barlow
Eleanor Barlow
3 years ago
Reply to  Fraser Bailey

Lol! If racism didn’t exist, Hirsch would invent it. Otherwise,what else has she got to offer that could lead to the well paid employment she currently enjoys? Sweet FA.

clem alford
clem alford
3 years ago
Reply to  Eleanor Barlow

Absolutely. I am an ethnic minority in London being an elderly white Brit male!! Where is my representative organization with a big government grant?. Didn’t even get any benefits from Covid!!

Starry Gordon
Starry Gordon
3 years ago
Reply to  clem alford

Need an org? Start one. I joked to a young Black activist that I had six strikes against me, being an upper-middle-class older cis het White male. She laughed and promised to protect me.

Annette Kralendijk
Annette Kralendijk
3 years ago
Reply to  Starry Gordon

I promise you, that is not what she was actually thinking.

Hilary Tait
Hilary Tait
3 years ago
Reply to  Starry Gordon

They will not protect you.

michael harris
michael harris
3 years ago
Reply to  clem alford

In London he might well be. Certainly if he goes out onto the street. But, Ben, do you know the statistics? Or should Clem ‘feel’ he is not in the minority?

Fred Atkinstalk
Fred Atkinstalk
3 years ago
Reply to  clem alford

In London he is. Check your facts.

Douglas McNeish
Douglas McNeish
3 years ago

His truth; his lived experience.

Douglas McNeish
Douglas McNeish
3 years ago
Reply to  clem alford

But you are here, thankfully.

Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago
Reply to  Eleanor Barlow

Have to agree there! and watching the way they move stats on Rape and Poverty – its as close as they can get to inventing more crime…so they can keep funding and the job.
Over the past 35 years, the rate of rape in the U.S. has fallen by an astonishing 80 per cent. The views of women are far better than anything we have ever had!, yet anti-rape organizations convey an impression that women are in more danger than ever! PLus the definition of rape has changed to a very very low bar.
Having sex and regretting it later is not being sexually assaulted. Agreeing to sex you weren’t 100 percent sure you wanted to have is not being sexually assaulted. Having consensual sex under the influence of alcohol is not being sexually assaulted…
But now it is…

Last edited 3 years ago by Natalija Svobodné
Douglas McNeish
Douglas McNeish
3 years ago
Reply to  Fraser Bailey

Or any disciple of D’Angelo’s White Fragility ready to “educate” us that denial of racism is the surest indication of its presence.

Paul Wicks
Paul Wicks
3 years ago
Reply to  David Morley

Kehinde Andrews already saying it.

clem alford
clem alford
3 years ago
Reply to  Alex Mitchell

The race relations industry is a shame. Even Trevor Phillips said it.

Robin Lambert
Robin Lambert
3 years ago
Reply to  clem alford

Shame or Sham or both.The ”grievance” industry never sleeps hates to be Challenged

Alison Houston
Alison Houston
3 years ago

Why do we have to reject the idea that we are racist, why not accept it and embrace it and assert our right to enjoy our long settled culture, traditions and history?

If musical notation is ‘racist’ so be it, if the music of Mozart is ‘racist’ so be it. If Georgian architecture is racist, so what? Nobody cares, let morons be offended and oppressed by beauty and intelligence.

The time has come to stand up to the bullying, not to keep rolling over. We should say yes, our long established western and British traditions, our history, our culture our thought processes are connected to this place and the people who settled here many centuries ago. Just as your history and traditions and culture are related to the place your antecedents inhabited. We are fully entitled to our culture, traditions and to learn from our history in this place, just as your antecedents are entitled to theirs in their place. Political leaders were wrong to impose our traditions on the country of your antecedents, but two wrongs don’t make a right. You do not have the right to impose your culture and traditions in this place, as your antecedents chose to come here you must accept the place as it is.

We have given much more than enough ground already. Britain must not become a hideous porridge of all the worst aspects of tribal Africa, the Middle East, Pakistan and India. Time to stop saying we aren’t racist and to say our ‘racism’ is the means by which we hold fast to that which is good, those values of fairness and and equality before the law, which had existed for centuries before your antecedents arrived and many of which were the reason they escaped here in the first place.

David Morley
David Morley
3 years ago
Reply to  Alison Houston

Why do we have to reject the idea that we are racist, why not accept it and embrace it and assert our right to enjoy our long settled culture, traditions and history?

I understand what you are saying, but you are conceding too much in accepting a ridiculously wide definition of racism. The whole idea needs to be rejected, that if you don’t disparage your own culture and heritage you must be racist.
Racism is when you disparage everyone else’s.

Starry Gordon
Starry Gordon
3 years ago
Reply to  David Morley

Actually, racism is a political theory which depends on three cardinal principles: (1) There are physical races; (2) some races are better than others; (3) the better races should act to rule the lesser or lower ones. There is really no objective basis for the first principle, so in effect ‘race’ does not exist except as a social convention. Unfortunately, the social convention proved very useful to those promoting imperial projects and was carefully nurtured, developed deep cultural roots, and will be hard to get rid of. But I would not accept designation as a racist unless you accept the principles of the ideology, which very few people actually do, even if they have a sneaking suspicion they and theirs are somehow considerably better than everyone else.

Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago
Reply to  Starry Gordon

Perhaps it depends where you learn political theory…
Racism as a consequence of ideology.
Racism from strong social dominance orientation.
Racism from group interests.
And Racism from ideological conservatism.
The four variations of Racism are closely associated with particular scholars…and their particular theories on racism (or at least as I understand it)

David Morley
David Morley
3 years ago
Reply to  Starry Gordon

There is really no objective basis for the first principle, so in effect ‘race’ does not exist except as a social convention. 

True in a sense, and false in a sense. Read DavidReich on the genetics.

Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago
Reply to  David Morley

DNA reveals what skin color obscures: We all have African ancestors. And we are Human
…Well debatable with some politicians…. ;P

Last edited 3 years ago by Natalija Svobodné
Alex Wilkinson
Alex Wilkinson
3 years ago
Reply to  Alison Houston

Always agree with you Alison. Keep it up.
Am I a white supremacist? No, I’m just white.

John Nutkins
John Nutkins
3 years ago
Reply to  Alex Wilkinson

Me too.

Pauline Ivison
Pauline Ivison
3 years ago
Reply to  Alex Wilkinson

Absolutely right. And, yes, Alison is spot on, as usual.

Ben Morris
Ben Morris
3 years ago
Reply to  Alison Houston

26 likes for this piece of racist vileness. what a website this is.

Jonathan Marshall
Jonathan Marshall
3 years ago
Reply to  Ben Morris

I’d like to think you were being ironic but I rather fear you’re absolutely serious, poor lamb.

Galeti Tavas
Galeti Tavas
3 years ago
Reply to  Ben Morris

And -8 for you, maybe not every one supports the anti-White racists.

Pauline Ivison
Pauline Ivison
3 years ago
Reply to  Ben Morris

I actually feel sorry for you…such a closed mind.

David B
David B
3 years ago
Reply to  Ben Morris

How is it racist?

Ben Morris
Ben Morris
3 years ago
Reply to  David B

She actually says she wants to accept the word racist, as Steve Bannon urged. This place is a sewer.

Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago
Reply to  Ben Morris

She wants to accept the word racist based on a poor argument… Not through actual racism.(that’s my opinion)
But if you can spot the racism and intent of maliciousness in her comment, I’d love to hear your opinion.
Otherwise I can only discredit your answer as an Intentional misrepresentation, because it is easier to defeat than an opponent’s real argument.
And worse still you attack the character, and motive of the person without evidence as to racism, Again! rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.
This is not a healthy way to talk with people, or examine ideas.

Last edited 3 years ago by Natalija Svobodné
Brian Dorsley
Brian Dorsley
3 years ago
Reply to  Ben Morris

What’s racist about it? Whether I agree with it or not, I found that she worded her opinion quite politely. What are your views? Your comment doesn’t make clear what you stand for.

Last edited 3 years ago by Brian Dorsley
Jon Redman
Jon Redman
3 years ago
Reply to  Ben Morris

Specifically which parts are “racist vileness”?

Ben Morris
Ben Morris
3 years ago
Reply to  Ben Morris

Hopp along, dimwit.

Jos Haynes
Jos Haynes
3 years ago
Reply to  Ben Morris

You are obviously completely out of your depth here. Why not try Twitter? More to your level, methinks.

Jayne Lago
Jayne Lago
3 years ago
Reply to  Ben Morris

Why are you on here then?

Jon Redman
Jon Redman
3 years ago
Reply to  Jayne Lago

To signal virtue, to preach, and to scold.

John Nutkins
John Nutkins
3 years ago
Reply to  Alison Houston

Well said.

Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago
Reply to  Alison Houston

“Why do we have to reject the idea that we are racist, why not accept it and embrace it and assert our right to enjoy our long settled culture, traditions and history”
Race and culture are two seperate things. We can and should assert Secular based human rights, it maximises the amount of people that can be happy and free, it doesn’t rely on race either anyone from anywhere can have those values, Some of our traditions are also lovely and should be celebrated!
I’m not a racist for asserting those two things, And neither are you! so I don’t accept the epithet of racism in any form. But fight back with reasons as to why they are wrong! (So real racism still has a meaning, and good people don’t get lumped in with them to camouflage them)
Certainly everyone is tribal, and prefer to be grouped by interest, religion, sport, education, belief. Race matters little and adds little intrinsic value (but probably there people who still group people that way, either by preference or distain) – We do group – its natural! It’s what we do with that grouping that counts!
Racist architectural style…The georgian style architecture is inspired from our captors the Romans who AD 43 to AD 410 conquered us and apart from taking slaves, they gave us central heating, glass, roads, concrete, water powered milling machines, Aqueducts, sewage system, writing, numbers, philosophy, democracy…Without them we would have stayed illiterate tree huggers, moving boulders to line with the sun. When the Romans left our standard of living dropped and we lost the skill of glassmaking, central heating etc, it took us another 400 years to regain that level of skill and human capital. In short those buildings inspired us.
Political leaders were wrong to impose our traditions on the country of your antecedents I disagree they did this to stop slave trade in societies that resisted the closing of the slave markets – enough was enough!!
Slavery was done by every culture over millennia. And yes the West had slaves for a long time in its history! Including enslaving its own population!
However only the West, late in its history defeated slavery world wide – Other cultures just did not care about it!
THOMAS SOWELL – THE REAL HISTORY OF SLAVERY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWrfjUzYvPo

Last edited 3 years ago by Natalija Svobodné
Galeti Tavas
Galeti Tavas
3 years ago
Reply to  Alison Houston

We need to get some sort of National Scoring system in place where every Nation is studied on its contribution to global Art, Science, Maths, Philosophy, Literature, Theater, Freedom, Politics, Equality, Medicine, Charity, Education, Suffrage, Rule of Law, Agriculture, Freedom, Noble Prizes Won, and on and on.

Then one may only act with pride in ones people according to the score given. Naturally a British Person may hold the greatest pride in themselves and Nation of any on Earth. And it would not be racist as it would be documented and proven. Yes, we are better than everyone else, we could say by showing our score, and the racism industry would have to concede we are correct.

Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago
Reply to  Galeti Tavas

i’m not sure your list counts. Most are subjectively valued items! (As much as I love them!) They would have little relevance to other cultures because of geographic location, lifestyle, resources/ social beliefs and structure.
This is a human capital game of shared knowledge and experiences, of which give a culture the knowledge to survive and grow… Some countries were isolated, didn’t trade or come into contact with other ideas, They aren’t stupid because they don’t have a Parthenon or theater though! So
I think we should enjoy other cultures inventiveness, every culture survives in a world that is harsh! and all survive in different ways – take a city dweller into the desert – will they survive crossing it? We are specialised to patterns that work for us. we produce what works for us – some things work differently and some things are better.
One thing the west does better in my opinion is cooperate and work together and adopt new technology and thoughts readily, we are also lucky with our location close to other inventive cultures, so its easy to innovate and swap tech. Human Capital gains quickly…
we make cities that give all inhabitants broad equal rights and protections along with a quality of living, And this is where I believe our fight for democracy, and equal human rights have helped us to make cities and far less corruption, more rights and transparency for all citizens!
Rulers we have a say over! We can kick them out every 4 years! Having said that it is only my theory so far… But all the things we have are a result of that willingness to share and think of others circumstances.
Plenty of other countries with extraordinary wealth kept by only a few, and leaders are tyrants.
I think that could be a universal gift to others, just as we learnt this gift from the romans who in turn learnt if from the greeks.
I think we are not better in everything! But that this is the one thing that makes a difference to make life better for the majority of people regardless of sex race creed.

Last edited 3 years ago by Natalija Svobodné
Hilary Tait
Hilary Tait
3 years ago
Reply to  Galeti Tavas

We need to tell the boatloads of Africans that your list is meaningless. They must turn back now! And also, race is a social construct.

Terry M
Terry M
3 years ago
Reply to  Alison Houston

A better way to put this is to remember that all species have an instinctual ‘prejudice’ for close relatives, members of a local community, and members of their species, in that order. Humans are also saddled with this instinct for ‘in-group’ preference. It is a mark of the civilizing of humans that we can overcome this instinctual tendency that we judge to be wrong. Some take this so far as to call us ‘species-ists’ for favoring humans over animals.
Humans have many instincts that we need to consciously overcome in the name of ethics and morality. Rape is one. Male animals of many species ‘rape’ the females. This behavior is instinctual and has evolutionary benefits – the male’s genes get transmitted to the offspring. Humans have instituted many restrictions around male sexual aggressiveness to curb this immoral behavior, from marriage to burkas to jail sentences.
So, yes we are all born ‘racists’ in one sense. Education and civilization have squeezed the racism out of our species to a very great extent, but it will never be completely exterminated, as it is part of human nature.

Jon Redman
Jon Redman
3 years ago
Reply to  Terry M

Your race is just your extended family.

Starry Gordon
Starry Gordon
3 years ago
Reply to  Terry M

Well, humans could push tribalism to the point of completely exterminating themselves. That would solve the problem.

Hilary Tait
Hilary Tait
3 years ago
Reply to  Terry M

Any race who ‘overcomes’ their instinctual in-group preference will die out. You are watching this now in terms of Western Europeans, but it is in slow-motion, and there is only so much each of us will see in our respective lifetimes. You can fool yourself that you can, or have, conquered Nature, but She will win in the end.

Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago
Reply to  Hilary Tait

“Race – instinctual in-group preference”
I disagree
In-group preference isn’t limited to Race, or at least not limited so superficially! 
We are all mixtures of DNA of many races. Take a DNA test and see! The West is not homogeneous block – it is a mixture of many races and tribes!
Group preference is based often on other considerations. What genetics you come into contact with! “Race” is created with population movements, trade, war, exposure to other cultures and those mixtures.
Race is irrelevant – Culture however is more important, it is the glue of society! Culture is race agnostic! – Culture is the vehicle for ideas and values that all people can have and attain.
E.g an Saudi can have the same appreciation for human rights that I do.(For example Raif Badawi)  This is possible because Culture and race are of course different things. (perhaps culture is like a virus…the idea catches us, With the right idea we can be innoculated against bad cultural practices…)
So how does culture affect us?…The Cultural achievement Democracy: created by the Hellenic race. The amazing thought the common people should have a say! – Rather than be ruled by god like rulers, where citizens could only obey.
This cultural idea moved from the Hellenic race, to the romans then to roman colonies, then the world – It wasn’t bound to one race – it’s cultural! An idea that lasted longer than its own empires.
This applies now to Human rights another very precious gift! â€œEqual because of my Humanity, not because of my sex, race, religion or lack of religion.”
It’s not a fight about Race, but a fight about human rights – everyones worth as humans. Ensuring special interest groups don’t reformulate that idea to become something weaker and less effective – or worse something that benefits only a few.
In short culture is under attack, not our race!

Last edited 3 years ago by Natalija Svobodné
Hilary Tait
Hilary Tait
3 years ago

In-group preference isn’t limited by race to Europeans – that’s exactly my point. You are projecting how you feel onto all other races, and making huge assumptions that they can or will feel the same way about you. That’s fascinating that you use the Romans as an example, as they followed the same pattern that we now follow, namely, failing to breed and becoming a multi-culture. A democracy is only as good as its demos. Without the shared ethnic bonds of Philia, a democracy will become less democratic. An example, is the adoption in Britain (and other Western countries) of hate speech laws – more rigid authoritarianism is needed to keep the people under control. I am limited for time right now!

Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago
Reply to  Hilary Tait

Hillary do a DNA test 🙂 were all mixtures!
“Any race who ‘overcomes’ their instinctual in-group preference will die out”…”I put my own people before any other race or ethnic group”
…but perhaps I am not understanding you…? own people It’s quite vague. So I guess I’m curious how you define that in-group…
This sounds like a call to only mate with those who are ethnically alike, and that the wests problems because of…foreigners? But again In-group, how are you defining that?
I apologize if that’s not what you mean – well writing is never a great way to communicate is it! People can get confused!
You seem to make little consideration that its actually culture that is more important, race is after al a social construct as you point out! The level of melanin/ethnicity is really a very uninformed way to understand a person’s character or values in regards to human rights.
And no, not I’m not confused or projecting… Western human rights are a small rare gem in a world where those values are absent Where slavery, religious intolerance, and inequality and freedom of thought are apparent and the predominant view of other cultures, So I’m just as keen as you to see the west survive and thrive, and uphold those precious values. But being ethic X doesn’t mean you are culturally X
“Without the shared ethnic bonds of Philia, a democracy will become less democratic.”
Ethnic bonds make no impact on democracy human rights and the security of a country. There are many ‘homogenous’ populations that have had civil wars and uprisings… Indeed The UK with “shared ethnicity” enslaved the majority of its population for millenia and battled with itself – due to diverging ideas on culture, belief and human rights values.
I believe the burning of protestants and catholics was quite popular…

But then it comes back to how you are defining phillia / in-group, i’m still fuzzy on your definition…
“A democracy is only as good as its demos.”
I totally Agree!
It only works if the demos share basic precepts such as equal human rights based on common humanity regardless of sex race or religion. Such a thing is ethnically agnostic. And should be a prerequisite for life in the west! Lest it lead to tyranny of the masses.
Hate speech and blasphemy laws
I do agree on your abhorrence to hate speech and blasphemy laws – however the source of those were through a UN resolution and not your internal voters, who incidentally fought that resolution, and yes it does hi-light the need to be vigilant with human rights! with good leadership…(of which we are poorly lacking)
If we look at UN – and the increasing amount of anti-democratic countries that have voting power – well it causes me to be watchful and skeptical of the ability of the UN to uphold human rights.
I view our low birth-rate as more connected to the economy, and the very severe pressures on familys to provide for children in order to best prepared them for the future, Kids need increasing amounts of education to cope.
All while parents are struggling to find time, Work weeks get longer… Let alone the career interruption and effects on pension and old age poverty. (which make the impact of having a child a very real consideration) Let alone the current world trends in job stability, and the looming danger of AI. Plus the instability of being a globalised workforce, who have to move at a moments notice I’m away from all of my family, and live year to year on contract, so having a kid is not optimal, and probably won’t happen.It’s possible too I worry too much about providing all of that.

Peace.

Last edited 3 years ago by Natalija Svobodné
Hilary Tait
Hilary Tait
3 years ago

As it happens, I have done a DNA test, and am a bit of an amateur family historian. My DNA test shows me to be 100% European (being 98.1% British, and 1.9% Northwest Germanic). These results indicate what my group is. I understand myself to be descended from Celts and Germanic people originating from the Bell Beaker people of the Lower Rhine, similar groups who came to Britain at different times. I define my in-group as British, and then more widely, as European.
Experiments have shown that people will sacrifice more for those most closely genetically related to them, and that what they are willing to sacrifice will reduce as genetic proximity reduces. For example, I would readily sacrifice my own life for that of my children. This is how some Westerners, and most of the non-Western world operate. Have you heard the acronym WEIRD before? – Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich and Democratic. Westerners are unique and view the world in a unique way. The data shown here may open your eyes to just how different we are:
How racial groups rate each other (ljzigerell.com)
Yes, on a certain level, we are all mixtures. I even had my mother-in-law’s DNA tested as a Christmas present. She was 1.5% North Wales. The regional history content on the LivingDNA website noted the genetic uniqueness of the Welsh: “The survival of Welsh is in part a result of Wales’ segregated past, owed to its mountainous environment, and lack of linguistic influence from the Anglo-Saxons.” Because the Welsh were able to maintain a relative segregation, we are able to celebrate their diversity today, instead of their genetic, cultural, and linguistic diversity being merely absorbed into an English homogeneity (obviously not in the case of my mother-in-law!).
Perhaps another example could be the Japanese, who share some of their genes with the Yayoi migration from the Korean Peninsula.
I do not think that race is a social construct, I’m afraid that I must have said that with some sarcasm, which doesn’t translate well as the written word. When human remains are found, forensics are able to determine whether the bones are Black, White, or Asian – not socially constructed at all. I did leave a comment to that effect, but it was immediately labelled as needing some sort of oversight by the website (perhaps because I used the scientific terms, ending in -oid).
Yes, the English had inter-tribal conflict – which set them up for defeat at the hands of the Romans and other groups. The Maori of NZ, and Native Americans, behaved in a similar fashion, so this is universal. It would have been better strategy to come together against outside threats.
I call people to mate with whomsoever they wish to mate with, however I’m thoroughly sick of the constant barrage of advertisements and film showing mixed race couples. I’m sure there’s no agenda there (there goes the sarcasm again).
“the wests problems because of
foreigners?” The following link is a meta-analysis of studies of diversity, which I hope will be of interest:
v1.0 – Biological Ethnocentrism, The Negative Impact of Racial and Ethnic Diversity Upon Societies and Individuals [Final] (catbox.moe)
“Ethnic bonds make no impact on democracy human rights and the security of a country.” Yes, they do. I gave the example of the introduction of hate speech laws, and wonder how this advances our rights – it doesn’t of course, it erodes rights that we previously had. Out of curiosity, I’d like to live long enough to see the English go to minority (estimated to be about 2066) and see what happens to their armed forces. Like the country, it may just be a gradual transition – however, many is the time I’ve read comments to the effect that the writer would never fight for their country as it is today even when not in an ethnic minority. I endorse such comments.
Regardless of whether a country has “equal human rights based on common humanity regardless of sex race or religion” inequalities between racial groups will arise (that is because race and racial differences are real, and group selection is real, for example, Indians will generally hire their own once in a position to do so). The inequalities that arise will provoke conflict. This is a problem that was blindingly obvious and need not have come about.
Progressives Declare War on Asians, Meritocracy and STEM – Asian Dawn (asian-dawn.com)
The reason that Western countries have undemocratically adopted multi-culturalism is because it keeps wages and conditions down, not because it fulfils some sort of human rights agenda. I don’t see the need for the West to take responsibility for spreading human rights, or anything else, to the rest of the world. Black and brown people are quite capable of determining their own futures.

Hilary Tait
Hilary Tait
3 years ago

Hi, I have posted a reply, but it has come up with an “Awaiting for approval” notice – I have no idea why.

Aaron Kevali
Aaron Kevali
3 years ago
Reply to  Alison Houston

“We have given much more than enough ground already. Britain must not become a hideous porridge of all the worst aspects of tribal Africa, the Middle East, Pakistan and India. Time to stop saying we aren’t racist and to say our ‘racism’ is the means by which we hold fast to that which is good, those values of fairness and and equality before the law, which had existed for centuries before your antecedents arrived and many of which were the reason they escaped here in the first place.”
Ouch! Comment of the month here, good for you Alison.

kathleen carr
kathleen carr
3 years ago
Reply to  Alison Houston

There is also the problem of perceived to be racist. I went to see my usual GP ( about 2 years ago) and instead there was a young black doctor who I didn’t know . On a later occassion I had to refer to this doctor ( whose name I didn’t know) and I honestly wondered if it was illegal for me to call her black ( in order to describe her )-fortunately the receptionist knew who it was.

Jayne Lago
Jayne Lago
3 years ago
Reply to  kathleen carr

I am old enough to know when the N word was used to describe a member of an ethnic group. That changed, the word black was used for some time until it was deemed insulting. Then there was another outcry and a request from the ethnic groups, to be termed ‘coloured’. Now it would appear that ‘coloured’ is not acceptable and that we should use ‘black’. Is it any wonder we are in this mess?

kathleen carr
kathleen carr
3 years ago
Reply to  Jayne Lago

The new ‘correct’ word is BIPOC.

Pagar Pagaris
Pagar Pagaris
3 years ago
Reply to  Alison Houston

But to agree with you would be to deny the precept of cultural relativism on which our whole inter racial society is based. Orchestral music can have no more intrinsic value than the output of a black man banging a bongo drum in the jungle.
To suggest that it might have is necessarily racist.

Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago
Reply to  Pagar Pagaris

which is better? ” Orchestral music vs bongo drum in the jungle.”
Well to be fair “better” in this case is entirely subjective. Both are music, Much like I prefer Mozart to Elevator music.
Cultural relativism annoys me on things that are not only different but measurably better.
For example roman numerals are different, but certainly they are less effective for the purpose of counting and doing equations with for that we would use Arabic numerals – Because they are less prone to error, they do the job better, and far more efficiently.
But with relativism, we are not allowed to make a value judgement on the effectiveness of the other system. This is simply dishonest ego massaging!
The same to with sciences vs traditional cures
 so on and so on. What achieves the purpose with more effect and precision is obviously better!

Last edited 3 years ago by Natalija Svobodné
peers.lilian
peers.lilian
3 years ago
Reply to  Alison Houston

Well said Alison. If people want to enter our Island Nation, they should be prepared to accept our cultures, language and if they want to practice a different religion don’t try to foist it on the indigenous population. Dress as we do which is suitable for the climate in which we live. I would say that over the years, I am 86, I have noticed that ethnic minorities are speaking English with an English accent, which in itself will help to integration.

Igor Sagdejev
Igor Sagdejev
3 years ago
Reply to  Alison Houston

Alison… you know that the countries you list are your Dearest Commonwealth Family! The Family to whom the Leavers have appealed to vote for Brexit, early on in the Referendum campaign (that almost made me throw up). Of course, it was from Poland, Lithuania, Romania, and Bulgaria that the “worst aspects” were coming from 🙂

Wilmot Britt
Wilmot Britt
3 years ago
Reply to  Alison Houston

Britain, and the West in general (especially America), need to allocate their attention bandwidth elsewhere instead of courting “diversity” and the issues which naturally arise from it. Reports about academic success may show that the U.K. is doing integration better than others, and oftentimes you will hear of minority contributions to the economy (which are mixed, given what Murray shows in “The Strange Death of Europe”), but the social aspects and long-term consequences are almost never discussed because it runs against the narrative. The U.S. is case and point of what happens in these long-term social experiments. “Wokeness”, for instance, could exist in a homogenous nation. You could have a bunch of self-flagellating Whites running around dwelling on the ills of colonialism, but it inevitably gains more traction if an aggrieved party resides within your walls (e.g. Blacks). Many of America’s political and cultural problems are the result of roughly 60-120 years of demographic shifts that the natives got no say in. In the process, the definition of an American has whittled away and even “Heritage Americans”–those worried about preserving a national identity–have little uniformity in how they describe it, besides talking points about freedom. Conservatives like Charlie Kirk have described the country as a “placeholder of ideas”. Well, excuse me, but how does a multicultural, multiracial nation of “ideas” survive a stress test? It doesn’t and that’s why it’s fraying at the edges and has been for many years. I see this happening in Britain and it’s a scary proposition.

Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago
Reply to  Wilmot Britt

“You could have a bunch of self-flagellating Whites running around dwelling on the ills of X”
“X” is just a way for person y to achieve a new social status or right. Yep we’ve only done that a few million times in history!.. Sometimes for good, sometimes for ill…
Virtue-signalling as a route to social status, isn’t even new. Unfortunately it collides with the wests eurocentric view on the slave trade (Which all cultures did – but we don’t get taught! So lack the skills to rebut a lot of false information.
So it’s the perfect storm, of not sticking up for equality and failing to appreciate the freedoms we have and won. (and secured for others)
All through not knowing history.

Last edited 3 years ago by Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago
Reply to  Wilmot Britt

“Heritage Americans have little uniformity in how they describe what America is.”
I’ve alway felt this was a little bit of the slide of hand question – I doubt you could ever get consensus on what a country is. A country is a subjective experience for every inhabitant… But I wonder if there is more luck to say: What a country isn’t.
The majority would agree on the values they want to cherish: isn’t sexist, racist, opposed to other religions, or freedom to speech.
At least in IMO, It’s the things we don’t want that should align.

Last edited 3 years ago by Natalija Svobodné
Jayne Lago
Jayne Lago
3 years ago
Reply to  Alison Houston

Brilliant……..but I think it is too late! Watch what happens now about the Tony Sewell report. There are NO consequences for your actions today. We see it in schools, industry, local government , universities and also the race issue. I cannot think of one person in any party, that is prepared to challenge the wokeraty, the students, the blm supporters, the ext rebellion clowns, the LBGT and Trans groups, The Me too brigade or the general mob culture that appears to have become one long gang of miseries!

Jayne Lago
Jayne Lago
3 years ago
Reply to  Alison Houston

You still here?

Jon Redman
Jon Redman
3 years ago

At the moment there are literally no consequences to anyone who levels a smear of racism. None at all. You can call anyone white a racist without fear of any comeback. This has to end.
We need a few commissars of the race grievance industry to be charged with criminal libel or slander the next time they accuse someone of racism, and when found guilty, jailed for a suitably long time; eight to ten years, perhaps, with little chance of parole because of the high probability of reoffending. David Lammy, Diane Abbott and their ilk would be good candidates. Meanwhile, the likes of the Runnymede Trust should be prosecuted with the full force of the law – the ones on terrorist financing would suit quite well.

J J
J J
3 years ago
Reply to  Jon Redman

The thing that depresses me most about the radical Left is they have given cover to people like you. I can assure you the author of this article and most of the people in the country do not support people like you.

Last edited 3 years ago by J J
Mel Shaw
Mel Shaw
3 years ago
Reply to  Jon Redman

It won’t happen, of course, but the Charity Commission should investigate what charitable purpose the Runnymede Trust actually serves. Perpetuating and encouraging racial divisions doesn’t qualify in my book.

John Nutkins
John Nutkins
3 years ago
Reply to  Jon Redman

Well said. Add Dawn Butler and the infantile and utterly stupid 24-year old black MP for some Nottingham constituency who recently said, having seen the news of the mindless and abominable mob wrecking parts of Bristol and attacking the police, that she was waiting for more evidence that there had been any any rioting.
These lamentable creatures and their like do more to stir up racism in this country, by which I mean blacks like them saying I and the rest of the country are racist. It is grossly insulting, utterly mendacious, offensive in the extreme and divisive to the core!

M Dibley
M Dibley
3 years ago
Reply to  John Nutkins

These comments are just as nakedly divisive and – yes – racist, as those you purport to stand against. The other side of the very same coin. The race grifter industry is just as ethnically diverse as any other dissection of UK society, and characterising it as ‘blacks saying I am the rest of the country is racist’ is plain wrong.
I’m all for higher penalties for false accusations of racism, such as well-enforced and high-cost fines, but criminal action and jail time for words? That’s dangerous territory and, again, just the other side to widespread assault on free speech we seem to be experiencing in the early part of the 21st century.
Dr Tony Sewell and many others like him have it 100% correct that the only way to reduce racism is to – quite simply – stop viewing the world through the distorting lens of race (and grievance studies) and focus on your own individual merits. And that we must do away with this damaging myth of ‘institutional racism’ in order to tackle the multi-faceted origins of the very real class-based disparities in this country.

Last edited 3 years ago by M Dibley
Jon Redman
Jon Redman
3 years ago
Reply to  M Dibley

Er, wakey-wakey: you can already do “jail time for words” under both the defamation and hate speech laws. I am merely suggesting that existing laws be enforced, in a non-racist way, by charging people with a criminal offence where they have deliberately defamed someone with the casual accusation of racism. This is the gravest smear possible, and is always a bid to destroy the targets’ lives.
The next time some smart ar5e “comedian” says that Boris Johnson is a racist, or some repellent student activist says that Jordan Peterson is, that individual should be criminally charged with libel. They can, if they wish, then plead Not Guilty, and produce their evidence of racism to a jury, offering the defence of truth. If they can’t persuade the jury, they are convicted.
Criminals of this sort should also be very heavily fined in addition. This particularly nasty libel is always intended to ruin someone’s life, so we need a few examples where the life ruined is that of the libeller.
It is utterly unacceptable that there should be laws criminalising hate speech against ethnic or religious minorities, but none that punish hateful speech dressed up as self-righteous accusations of racism. A court managed to conclude David Irving was a racist. I don’t see David Lammy presenting much of a challenge.

Last edited 3 years ago by Jon Redman
Arnold Grutt
Arnold Grutt
3 years ago
Reply to  Jon Redman

You cannot be ‘charged with libel’. It’s a civil, not a criminal matter. The police cannot arrest you, and the courts cannot hear the case until a private citizen lodges a complaint on his/her own behalf.

Last edited 3 years ago by Arnold Grutt
Jon Redman
Jon Redman
3 years ago
Reply to  Arnold Grutt

That can change.

Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago
Reply to  Jon Redman

charging people who defame others with the casual accusation of racism…
That will only work and be fair if Racism is seen as something all races can do! – With the new definition of the word (popular with leftists progressives – it is defined as prejudice combined with social and institutional power) Meaning only white people could be charged!
But of course we know the original meaning is more accurate – “prejudice against a person on the basis of ethnic group” Meaning everyone can be racist.
Orwellian games with language.designed to limit the individual’s ability to think and articulate “subversive” concepts such as personal identity, self-expression and free will… and in this case to muddy the concept that all races can be equally evil and bigoted.

Last edited 3 years ago by Natalija Svobodné
Grant Evans
Grant Evans
3 years ago
Reply to  Jon Redman

But Johnson is a racist……read his Telegrapph column…watermelon smiles and pickininies

Last Jacobin
Last Jacobin
3 years ago
Reply to  Grant Evans

He’s worse. I don’t think he deep down believes in anything other than himself but he says racist things to make himself attractive to racists. Who then vote for him.

Cheryl Jones
Cheryl Jones
3 years ago
Reply to  Grant Evans

I don’t think you actually read that column, if you did you would know that the point he was making was the complete opposite of racist, it was a criticism of Tony Blair’s patronising white saviour tendencies. Same as his infamous burqa piece. If you actually read it and understand it he is DEFENDING the right to wear it while acknowledging the very real criticisms you can make of it as a symbol of an oppressive religion and the visceral revulsion some of us feel when we see it.

Jos Haynes
Jos Haynes
3 years ago
Reply to  Jon Redman

“slander”

Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago
Reply to  M Dibley

A free society is never equal, and an equal society is never free.

Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago
Reply to  John Nutkins

And also forgets that it was the west that stopped slavery! After I found out about the white slave-trade and looked over our own internal slavery, The history of serfs and indentured workers,(All white I might add) All the people that were stolen from the UK and taken to Algeria and sold to the ottomans. And all the cultures that resisted having slave markets shut. (And had to be shut by force through western powers)
I’ve since got a bit fed up with the intensely eurocentric arguments on race and slavery! Totally worth a watch. The West needs to regain its pride.
THOMAS SOWELL – THE REAL HISTORY OF SLAVERY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWrfjUzYvPo

Last edited 3 years ago by Natalija Svobodné
Cheryl Jones
Cheryl Jones
3 years ago

I’ve also noticed it’s not just eurocentric criticism – it’s very much ANGLOcentric. France, Spain Holland etc seem to get a largely free pass despite their imperial pasts and their lack of fortitude in stamping out the slave trade which was largely left to Britain.. Britain (as in England – the Scots try to deny their part in the Empire) is often singled out – I wonder how much of it simply jealousy at the enormous influence Britain has had on the modern world.

clem alford
clem alford
3 years ago
Reply to  John Nutkins

You have become as a Wolverhampton MP sadly once said ‘a stranger in your own land’!

Ben Morris
Ben Morris
3 years ago
Reply to  John Nutkins

What total rubbish.

David Morley
David Morley
3 years ago
Reply to  Ben Morris

Sorry Ben but you’re going to have to expand on your answers or you just look silly. Pick a comment you feel worth arguing against and have a go. At the moment you’re behaving like you belong on Twitter.
you may well have sound reasons for your views – but as it is there is just no way of knowing.

Jayne Lago
Jayne Lago
3 years ago
Reply to  John Nutkins

The problem is that we have no one in our corner. The media ie TV would have it freeze over in hell before allowing any white heterosexual person onto their superior discussion programmes. They are completely out of touch with the sane, mature, common sense people of this country.

Last edited 3 years ago by Jayne Lago
Last Jacobin
Last Jacobin
3 years ago
Reply to  Jayne Lago

There are white heterosexual people on TV discussion programmes every day so you are mistaken, exaggerating or effect or lying.

clem alford
clem alford
3 years ago
Reply to  Jon Redman

Yes, Abbott and Lammy for starters as they are openly black racists. Then MP Naz Shah, in Starmer’s shadow cabinet, for telling the raped white children in Oldham and Huddersfield to shut up in the interests of social cohesion. What is happening in the UK?

Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago
Reply to  clem alford

OMG I thought you were overstating!… It’s hard to believe an MP can even talk that way to a constituency…!
“Those abused girls in Rotherham and elsewhere just need to shut their mouths. For the good of diversity.”
https://metro.co.uk/2017/08/23/mp-shares-tweet-saying-abuse-victims-should-shut-their-mouths-for-good-of-diversity-6872181/
Disgusting behaviour!

Last edited 3 years ago by Natalija Svobodné
Tony Price
Tony Price
3 years ago

I think that you should look that up – she didn’t say it as such and that matters.

Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago
Reply to  Tony Price

Fair enough, I stand corrected! She liked and shared a tweet in 2017 which said: “Those abused girls in Rotherham and elsewhere just need to shut their mouths. For the good of diversity”
A tiny mercy, at very least she didn’t say it… But think it and agree and view it worthy of sharing she did!
ï»żSafe to say, I think that matters what MPs click on and like…
But I’m not sure such a thing should be liked, endorsed and shared either! It’s still pretty disgusting…

Last edited 3 years ago by Natalija Svobodné
Tobye Pierce
Tobye Pierce
3 years ago

The Rotherham and similar incidents are the most repulsive examples of racism in Britain. But no one seems to care much about them-evidently poor white girls lives don’t count. If the roles were exchanged the reaction to the situ would be quite different.

Hilary Tait
Hilary Tait
3 years ago
Reply to  Tony Price

She agreed with the sentiment, hence the re-tweet.

Hilary Tait
Hilary Tait
3 years ago
Reply to  clem alford

Multi-culture is happening. Each group advocates for the interests of their own group. This is natural. Westerners are unnatural. They no longer operate under the laws of group selection (because that would be racist). As non-racists, they will disappear, or their remnants will be dominated by another group or groups. Multi-culture promotes ethnic conflict.

Lydia R
Lydia R
3 years ago

The other outstanding conclusion of note is that 60% of Afro-Caribbean children live in fatherless families and this is a big factor in inequality. “Lived experience” doesn’t cut it when it comes to facts and statistics.

Geoff H
Geoff H
3 years ago
Reply to  Lydia R

Facts will always trump ‘lived experience’, anecdotals, ‘feelings’ (bless), and all manner of wokery emanating from the cult of woke

Starry Gordon
Starry Gordon
3 years ago
Reply to  Geoff H

Heh — ‘trump’. But lived experience, anecdotes, feelings, and so forth _are_ facts.

Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago
Reply to  Geoff H

“Facts will always trump ‘lived experience”
Oh Your an optimist :O) I can only like you for that!
It’s even been suggested that logic has its roots in (wait for it) “white privilege,” and anyone who offers a rational argument that is not commensurate with victim culture is somehow racist.”
Good Western Logic as Merely White-Privilege Oppression”https://www.wsj.com/articles/good-western-logic-as-merely-white-privilege-oppression-11604865500
Why Postmodernists Reject Logic & Evidence
ï»żPostmodernists deny this Enlightenment faith in science and technology as instruments of human progress. … For postmodernists, reason and logic too are merely conceptual constructs and are therefore valid only within the established intellectual traditions in which they are used.
Indeed, many postmodernists hold that the misguided (or unguided) pursuit of scientific and technological knowledge led to the development of technologies for killing on a massive scale in World War II. Some go so far as to say that science and technology—and even reason and logic—are inherently destructive and oppressive, because they have been used by evil people, especially during the 20th century, to destroy and oppress others.
(They forget those same skills also saved millions…and even without science we’ve been killing each other quite successfully for millenia.)
…The irony, we send people to learn… and they come away more retarded.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/postmodernism-philosophy

Last edited 3 years ago by Natalija Svobodné
Mark Preston
Mark Preston
3 years ago

The left have been ignoring the lack of evidence for a ‘gender pay gap’ for decades. Do you seriously imagine they’ll just admit to being wrong on race and all go home?

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
3 years ago

Sorry to drag this back to the Ginge & Whinge royal drama – but the “wielding of the hammer” is also perfectly encapsulated in reactions to this. In the days/weeks following the Oprah “interview”, it became virtually impossible to even indirectly question Meghan’s “truth” (bye-bye Piers Morgan, bye-bye Sharon Osbourne) about racism in the Royal family, despite the glaring discrepancies if not downright fallacies in her account that had to cause any person with an IQ of more than 60 to say “hang on a minute!” But it was fine to assume that – just because the Royal family, a national institution, currently only has white members and Britain has a colonial history – they must all be racist and bigoted now.

Paul Blakemore
Paul Blakemore
3 years ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

I was highly amused by MP David Lammy’s reaction to the report: which was straight out of the Whinge playbook. He said it was ”gaslighting” then refused to talk about it further for the sake of his ”mental health”: what a big baby! And pure comedic gold (I am obviously not a ‘kind’ person).

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul Blakemore

I reject the way that the “be kind” argument is used less as a call for a more caring society and more as a tool to shut down arguments that don’t fit a certain narrative. The word “kind” is falling prey to verbicide.

John Nutkins
John Nutkins
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul Blakemore

And let us not forget that the lamentable Lammy is the Rabble Party’s shadow Justice Minister. His lies have been well and truly exposed publicly, something we already knew long ago, of course.

Galeti Tavas
Galeti Tavas
3 years ago
Reply to  John Nutkins

A flea denouncing the dog for not respecting it.

Ben Morris
Ben Morris
3 years ago
Reply to  John Nutkins

Which lies? Lammy is an excellent man.

Robin Lambert
Robin Lambert
3 years ago
Reply to  Ben Morris

If he is your Version of ”Excellent man” you are obviously ignorant and You should Get lost pronto..Overweight lammy has lied about his expenses since he became an mP

Toby Josh
Toby Josh
3 years ago
Reply to  Ben Morris

Now I know that you’re just savouring the sensation of being inflammatory. Just in case you’re in earnest, may I ask if you ever saw the David Lammy celebrity Mastermind video?

Tom Fox
Tom Fox
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul Blakemore

Is that what ‘gaslighting’ means – defeating an argument with facts and objective data?
Sewell and his panel of mostly black investigators simply pointed out that in most of British society there is no systemic racism. Indeed Black African, Bangladeshi, Indian and East Asian children do better at school than the average for white children, and also wage disparity though still present in a small degree (about 2%) does not exist at all among the younger cohort of the population. These are the facts…. Of course Lammy does not want them to be aired. He has made a career out of asserting the opposite. Interestingly for Lammy and Lord Woolley and others of the systemic racism brigade, the extremely white, Irish Traveller children do the worst and are most often thrown out of schools. It is all about behaviour and the culture in which you are brought (or dragged) up. A significant proportion of West Indian ethnicity children are very badly brought up, are involved as they get older in very serious levels of crime and do very badly at school. Children who look exactly like them, but are born in African families with decent values who work hard and inculcate the same sort of values into their children, do very well. Lammy won’t like that at all, and neither did Lord Woolley on the radio this morning.

Last edited 3 years ago by Tom Fox
Eleanor Barlow
Eleanor Barlow
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul Blakemore

If he’s concerned about his mental health, I wonder what the hell he is doing working in politics?

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
3 years ago
Reply to  Eleanor Barlow

Yes, Eleanor – exactly what I thought. Same goes for the snowflakes at publishing houses that have to seek out their safe spaces when their employer wants to publish a book that doesn’t cleave to their world view exactly. If they can’t deal with that, a publishing house may not be the right place for them.

Robin Lambert
Robin Lambert
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul Blakemore

See his Expenses for the past decade nearly ÂŁ2million,paid for by White taxpayers….Should be brought to book

Simon Pegler
Simon Pegler
3 years ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

It relates very well to the “interview” – I had also sensed the comparison. With any luck, Duchess Meghan has helped to expose the whole culture of wokeness for what it has become – a vicious and hypocritical charade, hopefully accelerating its demise.

Last edited 3 years ago by Simon Pegler
John Nutkins
John Nutkins
3 years ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

Well said, but may I be allowed to change ‘the glaring discrepancies if not downright fallacies’ to ‘contemptible, outright and bare-faced lies’?

Meghan Kathleen Jamieson
Meghan Kathleen Jamieson
3 years ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

I don’t necessarily disagree with your gist here, but I do think it’s fair to say that there are members of the RF who might be considered racist without it being an assumption – but based on things they’ve said and done. Of course some might point to Harry as the most likely candidate for that in his generation.

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
3 years ago

Yes, I take your point. And in a way, that would reflect what the Sewell report says about British society as a whole: while there might be instances of racism in Britain (which must be called out), it is wrong to extrapolate that and say that the problem is endemic/structural/institutional without sufficient evidence to back your argument up.

Last edited 3 years ago by Katharine Eyre
Galeti Tavas
Galeti Tavas
3 years ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

But the Royal Family has basically ‘Taken The Knee’ and is out to find and employ a ‘Race Czar’ to publicly berate them for being the greatest historical racists in a remarkably crazy act of self denunciation and self flagellation. Every day we find out how Britain’s generous open doors have not been appreciated, or helpful.

George Bruce
George Bruce
3 years ago

In fact if you wanted an example of an institutionally racist organisation, it would be the Guardian. The newspaper has its anti-white male line, the journalists know they have to follow it, right down to the sports journos.

David Boulding
David Boulding
3 years ago
Reply to  George Bruce

I enjoy the Guardian comments..Those that contribute are so horribly wrong on every matter they espouse it’s entertaining. But it makes me nervous to think that there are so many of them are so badly blinkered.

John Nutkins
John Nutkins
3 years ago
Reply to  David Boulding

No effort is required to be ignorant as that atrocious rag demonstrates every day.

Tom Fox
Tom Fox
3 years ago
Reply to  David Boulding

The Guardian is representative of a small minority of the population. They make a lot of noise but have no impact on the real world.

Eleanor Barlow
Eleanor Barlow
3 years ago
Reply to  Tom Fox

‘They make a lot of noise but have no impact on the real world.’

Unfortunately I think they do. Guardian readers/supporters are particularly prominent in charities and local authorities. They are often employed in senior positions where they have the power to turn their views into policy.

Fred Atkinstalk
Fred Atkinstalk
3 years ago
Reply to  Eleanor Barlow

Don’t forget teaching. Many, if not most, of the teachers I know are Guardianistas, consistently pouring wokist bile into the ears of the impressionable young.

Starry Gordon
Starry Gordon
3 years ago
Reply to  Tom Fox

Well, they occasioned your comment.

Robin Lambert
Robin Lambert
3 years ago
Reply to  Tom Fox

except BBC which buys around 25,000 copies daily at ÂŁ2.20 overexpensive sh**** Also Gates foundation funnells money in to keep it from folding,unfortunately

Ben Morris
Ben Morris
3 years ago
Reply to  George Bruce

a ridiculous comment. as a white male I have never felt threatened by the Guardian. why are you such a snowflake?

Rob Mcneill-wilson
Rob Mcneill-wilson
3 years ago
Reply to  Ben Morris

He didn’t write that he felt threatened by the stupid rag. Anyway, it’s a snowflake rag, so perhaps that’s why you didn’t feel threatened.

Toby Josh
Toby Josh
3 years ago

Apologies, I just went and restated your point. Good comment, though.

Brian Dorsley
Brian Dorsley
3 years ago
Reply to  Ben Morris

It’s a magazine for sexless cultural scolds and moralistic midwits. I find it faintly threatening, but am glad that its journalists and commentators are free to air their hatred and prejudices out in the open. Hopefully having that outlet online will keep them off the streets and prevent them from rioting and tearing down statues or some other such rot.

Toby Josh
Toby Josh
3 years ago
Reply to  Ben Morris

No one mentioned feeling threatened. ‘Threatening’ is not part of any of the usual definitions of racism. Perhaps you’re one of those people who puts emotions as closer to truth than facts.

Lydia R
Lydia R
3 years ago

The interviews by various BBC reporters, Channel 4 and ITV showed their usual impartiality. One of the Commission appeared on Channel 4 and put his case calmly and rationality. Then 2 race grifters appeared, bloviating about micro aggressions, subtle racism and lived experience.

A Spetzari
A Spetzari
3 years ago
Reply to  Lydia R

But didn’t you know that the worst, most vicious kind of prejudice is that which you cannot define or explain or identify? See Reni Eddo-Lodges book for more detail on this.
It’s like sociopathic homeopathy you see. The more diluted it is, the stronger it becomes.

Richard Spicer
Richard Spicer
3 years ago
Reply to  Lydia R

ITV news rolled in all the usual opposition to the Commission and did not invite anyone to support it. How balanced is that?

Tom Fox
Tom Fox
3 years ago
Reply to  Richard Spicer

This morning Mishal Husein did two interviews which were very different. She worked Alex Salmond over big time so that he came out probably sweating and shaking with impotent rage and shock. Lord Wooley on the other hand was asked a couple of very soft questions about his attitude to the Sewell report and was allowed to spend a lot of time dealing in generalities and anecdotes about the 1970s and propagating the idea that the UK is an institutionally racist society top to bottom. It was a ‘what would you like to say?’ kind of interview. Mishal Husein did not ask him at all about the very great differences in the performance, criminality or other differences between the different groups which make up the so called BAME population. The differences are huge. They are certainly not all the same.
All we got was him saying how hurtful it all was and that the report was a whitewash by the government of a serious problem. She just gave him a platform to say what he had prepared earlier.

Last edited 3 years ago by Tom Fox
Peter de Barra
Peter de Barra
3 years ago
Reply to  Tom Fox

… the usual term is “”over representation within the deviant group””

Tom Fox
Tom Fox
3 years ago
Reply to  Lydia R

micro aggressions, subtle racism and lived experience”, trump actual data any day.

Vikram Sharma
Vikram Sharma
3 years ago

The report is spot on. Institutional Racism is unverifiable and depends on circular reasoning.
X is doing worse than Y. This proves that UK is institutionally racist.
Why do yo think X is doing worse than Y? Because UK is institutionally racist.
How do you know UK is institutionally racist? Because X is doing worse than Y.
So you never try to find out why X is doing worse than Y. Just keep handing over public money to organisations that depend upon the notion of Institutional Racism to milk the system.

Igor Sagdejev
Igor Sagdejev
3 years ago
Reply to  Vikram Sharma

I can understand why those “of colour” themselves are doing it. Hard to escape temptation to get more goodies.
Same with those in “the industry”.
But the white Lefties (except those for whom this is the profession) really get on my nerves.
And yes, the logic is completely missing here, and I don’t think anything can be fixed with this hammer.

Alan Girling
Alan Girling
3 years ago
Reply to  Igor Sagdejev

The white lefties, according to Shelby Steele, are motivated by sheer terror and self-loathing. The terror that they themselves will be accused. The fervour of their denunciations is a protective shield against the same. It’s the constant refrain of, “I am innocent, I am innocent. Let me be.”

David B
David B
3 years ago
Reply to  Alan Girling

Correct, a lot of it ultimately proves to be projection. Weinstein’s feminism is a good recent example.

Hammer Klavier
Hammer Klavier
3 years ago
Reply to  Vikram Sharma

An excellent summary!

Meghan Kathleen Jamieson
Meghan Kathleen Jamieson
3 years ago
Reply to  Vikram Sharma

This is the problem that has been pointed out by the American socialist academic Adolph Reed Jr. He points out that “institutional racism” is not an explanation of mechanism, but simply a not very useful label given to a observed disparity of unknown origin. So from the position of the traditional left, completely useless to actually create change.

Ian Barton
Ian Barton
3 years ago

The measured approach being taken by the government to carefully undermine the “racism industry” is definitely to be applauded.
Hopefully next up will be the “gender pay gap” industry.

David B
David B
3 years ago
Reply to  Ian Barton

A different head of the same hydra really.

Richard Lord
Richard Lord
3 years ago

Racism does indeed exist. Just this morning radio 4 trailed a radio programme where black musicians discuss a particular style of music. Would we ever hear this about a group of white musicians? Those who protest about racism cannot have it both ways.

Matt Whitby
Matt Whitby
3 years ago
Reply to  Richard Lord

Someone I know called Burnley FC racist because their whole first team is white, when it was pointed out that Dwight McNeil and a number of their young players coming through are not, the response was “yeah but he LOOKS white!” Ok then…

John Nutkins
John Nutkins
3 years ago
Reply to  Matt Whitby

Whereas in their recent home match against Leeds United, Fulham’s first eleven had nine black players starting, yet Sky’s oleaginous and nauseating commentators bang on about equality, lack of opportunity and justice. The hypocrisy and stupidity, apart from the insult, are breathtaking.

Starry Gordon
Starry Gordon
3 years ago
Reply to  Richard Lord

Don’t you have people who perform traditional music from the various tribes that compose Great Britain? We certainly do in the US and every other country I know about.

Robin Lambert
Robin Lambert
3 years ago
Reply to  Richard Lord

Music of Black origin is Racist epithet,most Black jazz Greats like miles davis,John Coltrane,thelonius monk etc..would be appalled

sharon johnson
sharon johnson
3 years ago

I asked my 13 year old what she is studying in her Social Studies class. “Racism” she responded. Hmm. It appears I have my work cut out for me.
Sharon (San Francisco)

James Rowlands
James Rowlands
3 years ago
Reply to  sharon johnson

Complain, then if no response, change schools.
schools are a business. Would you still shop at your local supermarket if they called you a racist for asking if they had white cabbage?

Last edited 3 years ago by James Rowlands
Mark Preston
Mark Preston
3 years ago
Reply to  sharon johnson

Time to consider home schooling unless you like your children being brain washed.

Ben Morris
Ben Morris
3 years ago