White privilege and other matters

[Stumpy]

For me the issue always comes down to the fundamentals of human decency. Look to the content of a persons character as opposed to the colour of their skin/[any other qualifier here]. The concept of white privilege is inherently racist because it discards the individual in favour of the group identity. This is what racism is, ignoring the individual to judge them by their immutable characteristics. To pick an obvious example, a poor white boy or man, in a council estate is not more privileged than Oprah or Meghan Markle.

People who grow up in a stable family environment are privileged. People who grow up with money are privileged. People who are physically attractive are privileged. People who have a good education are privileged. And there are many more examples of privilege that are not colour/gender/sexuality/whatever based. Until society gets back to valuing the individual (because that is where intersectionality will ultimately end up as the more you intersect the more you come to the singular) there will only be more division.

[Random1]

I’m starting to come around to the idea of institutional/systemic racism being a symptom of class war and so, I’ve changed my mind significantly since this Fred started.

By institutional/systemic racism do you mean that the institutions are themselves racist, or are dominated/unduly influenced by racists? It would be good to know which institutions are racist and how so. Or perhaps you are coming round to the view that if there is a racial disparity in any situation where an institution is involved then racism is at the heart of the disparity?

For me, an institution itself could be termed racist when it clearly advocates racist policies, eg. Harvard University regarding Asian students (note: Harvard are doing nothing unlawful).

The first one. I think an institution can be racist through its culture - whereas I was sceptical before.

As mentioned previously, I’m leaning on the side of unintentional bias due to policy writers trying to cater for the majority rather than minority. I’m now actually seeing genuine value in the things like equality and diversity impact assessments as a mechanism to minimise some of the negatives that can come with policy utilitarianism.

As an aside - The Harvard stuff is a really interesting one - as it highlights another mess of a concept - reverse racism. It’s a phrase that irritates me, as reverse racism is a phrase dependent upon the idea that racism being unidirectional

[Random1]

For me the issue always comes down to the fundamentals of human decency. Look to the content of a persons character as opposed to the colour of their skin/[any other qualifier here]. The concept of white privilege is inherently racist because it discards the individual in favour of the group identity. This is what racism is, ignoring the individual to judge them by their immutable characteristics. To pick an obvious example, a poor white boy or man, in a council estate is not more privileged than Oprah or Meghan Markle.

People who grow up in a stable family environment are privileged. People who grow up with money are privileged. People who are physically attractive are privileged. People who have a good education are privileged. And there are many more examples of privilege that are not colour/gender/sexuality/whatever based. Until society gets back to valuing the individual (because that is where intersectionality will ultimately end up as the more you intersect the more you come to the singular) there will only be more division.

I agree with much of this - and I’ve watched and read a fair bit on the subject of individualism and collectivism.

It’s an area where I can see where people like Peterson and Shapiro are coming from on the underlying Marxism in much of this. I’m not fully convinced, but I’m not as dismissive on that thought process as I used to be.

[Tichtheid]

Google tells me that L'Oreal heiress Françoise Bettencourt Meyers is the richest woman in the world, with a fortune of billions.

Has she ever been locked out of a couture fashion store because of the colour of her skin? Or have sales reps who didn't recognise her refused to show her the items she asked for because they will be too expensive?

I asked because Oprah (fortune of billions) Winfrey, has had those experiences.



As for the white council estate guy, is he in any way in a different position to black council estate guy?

Look at the police stop and search and gang profiling data for the answer.

[notfatcat]

I must admit that I've never been locked out of a couture fashion store. Must be my white privilege. My life is so much more privileged than poor Oprah's.

[Tichtheid]

I must admit that I've never been locked out of a couture fashion store. Must be my white privilege. My life is so much more privileged than poor Oprah's.

The point is that racism exists whatever level of personal wealth you are at, that doors open as you go up the economic classes, but not all of them open for people of colour, sometimes literally.

[Ymx]

My take on white privilege is that it's a smokescreen for class privilege , which is something that applies across the globe and has done for much of history.

Smoke screen as in something that has been actively deployed by someone to obscure class division as the true picture?

Yes.

Look at when the big corporations started to push this stuff. Around 2011.

What was happening at the time? Occupy Wall Steet, one of the best class solidarity movements in years.

Now the big corps frame themselves as defenders of minorities (in a USA sense, no room for Afrikaners or Uyghurs) and they use that as a smokescreen and a defensive shield.

I hate to admit, as a capitalist, but you have to look at it.

These corporate giants avoiding the wrath of the left, despite.
- abusing personal information - when lefties go mad about govt use of personal data
- avoid paying tax - when lefties demanding the rich 1% pay all the tax
- protect their corporate wealth aggressively pushing around countries- yet promote left and socialist values in their content

[Ymx]

I must admit that I've never been locked out of a couture fashion store. Must be my white privilege. My life is so much more privileged than poor Oprah's.

The point is that racism exists whatever level of personal wealth you are at, that doors open as you go up the economic classes, but not all of them open for people of colour, sometimes literally.

I’d say there are far more cases of perceived injustice, and looking for any slight, than genuine prejudice.
I don’t quite follow why “perceived injustice” = “injustice” in the proof of white privilege.

[notfatcat]

I must admit that I've never been locked out of a couture fashion store. Must be my white privilege. My life is so much more privileged than poor Oprah's.

The point is that racism exists whatever level of personal wealth you are at, that doors open as you go up the economic classes, but not all of them open for people of colour, sometimes literally.

Yes that stands to reason. I guess I was being facetious because the information you supplied about Oprah was so scant. One thing that bugs me about these stories of racial discrimination or racial profiling is that they often come with no supporting evidence or context. Eg. the magazine editor (Vogue?) who stated he was racially profiled when a security guard told him he couldn't use the tradesman's entrance (this was in the press maybe a year ago). All we were given was his assertion that the security guard's motives were based on race. Zero evidence supplied.

Now, with Oprah - what else do we know about her experiences you mentioned? How was she dressed, how was she behaving, who was she dealing with, what was their ethnicity, is she exaggerating anything? A billionaire dressed as a vagrant is as unlikely to get served in a posh establishment as an actual vagrant, regardless of their race. People are profiled on more than race.

[Torquemada 1420]

Seeing as we don't have a 'Piers Morgan is a Cunt' thread this is as good a place as any to welcome the fact he's gone from ITV, although I'm sure he'll be off to spout bile on GB News with Andrew Neil before long.

Had to sit next to the insufferable c**t at a charity dinner many years ago along with some thicko, wendyball w*nkers. Was saved long term brain damage or a prison sentence by the company of Zinzan & his wife Ali who were equally uncomfortable with most of the overpaid morons attending, all fighting to show he/she had more money than the next person.

[Tichtheid]

I must admit that I've never been locked out of a couture fashion store. Must be my white privilege. My life is so much more privileged than poor Oprah's.

The point is that racism exists whatever level of personal wealth you are at, that doors open as you go up the economic classes, but not all of them open for people of colour, sometimes literally.

Yes that stands to reason. I guess I was being facetious because the information you supplied about Oprah was so scant. One thing that bugs me about these stories of racial discrimination or racial profiling is that they often come with no supporting evidence or context. Eg. the magazine editor (Vogue?) who stated he was racially profiled when a security guard told him he couldn't use the tradesman's entrance (this was in the press maybe a year ago). All we were given was his assertion that the security guard's motives were based on race. Zero evidence supplied.

Now, with Oprah - what else do we know about her experiences you mentioned? How was she dressed, how was she behaving, who was she dealing with, what was their ethnicity, is she exaggerating anything? A billionaire dressed as a vagrant is as unlikely to get served in a posh establishment as an actual vagrant, regardless of their race. People are profiled on more than race.

The story about her being locked out of a shop was when the people inside said that they were closed, but white people were going in.
They later said that they had been robbed by black people a couple of weeks before.

The incident in Switzerland was when she was shown a cheaper alternative to the one she ask for, this ended up drawing an official apology from the Swiss tourist board.

Why would Oprah Winfrey be dressed as a vagrant?

[notfatcat]

Why would Oprah Winfrey be dressed as a vagrant?

For some reason I occasionally confuse her with Whoopie Goldberg.

[Random1]

Google tells me that L'Oreal heiress Françoise Bettencourt Meyers is the richest woman in the world, with a fortune of billions.

Has she ever been locked out of a couture fashion store because of the colour of her skin? Or have sales reps who didn't recognise her refused to show her the items she asked for because they will be too expensive?

I asked because Oprah (fortune of billions) Winfrey, has had those experiences.



As for the white council estate guy, is he in any way in a different position to black council estate guy?

Look at the police stop and search and gang profiling data for the answer.

Do you feel as strongly about all prejudice?

Not leading down the garden path here, genuinely interested, as you’ve persevered here long after others have bailed.

I’m talking about the protected characteristics in the equality act.

Do you feel the same about sexism, ageism etc?

[Tichtheid]

Google tells me that L'Oreal heiress Françoise Bettencourt Meyers is the richest woman in the world, with a fortune of billions.

Has she ever been locked out of a couture fashion store because of the colour of her skin? Or have sales reps who didn't recognise her refused to show her the items she asked for because they will be too expensive?

I asked because Oprah (fortune of billions) Winfrey, has had those experiences.



As for the white council estate guy, is he in any way in a different position to black council estate guy?

Look at the police stop and search and gang profiling data for the answer.

Do you feel as strongly about all prejudice?

Not leading down the garden path here, genuinely interested, as you’ve persevered here long after others have bailed.

I’m talking about the protected characteristics in the equality act.

Do you feel the same about sexism, ageism etc?

Yes I do.

I've focussed on racism here but it's so easy to conflate one area of discrimination with another, especially when people are trying to shed what they feel might be guilt by way of being part of the majority group who are not discriminated against.

For example, there is definite structural discrimination against people who use wheel chairs, you see that in access issues all the time. That is being addressed for the most part and things are getting better, though there is still a way to go.

People don't seem to feel guilty and have knee-jerk reactions to living in an ableist society, even though it's so very easy to see that access issues still exist.

Why don't people try to cover up ablesim as being "just a smokescreen" for classism or economic inequality?


I'm just as prepared to talk about misogyny or homophobia or transphobia or any kind of discrimination, but it's important to not lose focus.

[assfly]

Just out of curiosity Tichtheid, where are you posting from? Just to give context to your approach.

[Tichtheid]

Just out of curiosity Tichtheid, where are you posting from? Just to give context to your approach.

I’m a Scot living in the south east of England, Brighton, I have previously lived and worked in the French Pyrenees.

[Random1]

Couple of really interesting pieces here. The first one’s an hour long and second is 15 mins.

If anyone’s found this Fred as interesting as me, I would really recommend watching them - they’re pieces involving the architect of the equality act in the Uk.

[Random1]

Google tells me that L'Oreal heiress Françoise Bettencourt Meyers is the richest woman in the world, with a fortune of billions.

Has she ever been locked out of a couture fashion store because of the colour of her skin? Or have sales reps who didn't recognise her refused to show her the items she asked for because they will be too expensive?

I asked because Oprah (fortune of billions) Winfrey, has had those experiences.



As for the white council estate guy, is he in any way in a different position to black council estate guy?

Look at the police stop and search and gang profiling data for the answer.

Do you feel as strongly about all prejudice?

Not leading down the garden path here, genuinely interested, as you’ve persevered here long after others have bailed.

I’m talking about the protected characteristics in the equality act.

Do you feel the same about sexism, ageism etc?

Yes I do.

I've focussed on racism here but it's so easy to conflate one area of discrimination with another, especially when people are trying to shed what they feel might be guilt by way of being part of the majority group who are not discriminated against.

For example, there is definite structural discrimination against people who use wheel chairs, you see that in access issues all the time. That is being addressed for the most part and things are getting better, though there is still a way to go.

People don't seem to feel guilty and have knee-jerk reactions to living in an ableist society, even though it's so very easy to see that access issues still exist.

Why don't people try to cover up ablesim as being "just a smokescreen" for classism or economic inequality?


I'm just as prepared to talk about misogyny or homophobia or transphobia or any kind of discrimination, but it's important to not lose focus.

Yeah, they’re slightly different beasts though aren’t they?

Anyone could become disabled tomorrow, and so there’s an increased empathy there. Plus disabled people can barely be called a minority anymore - a quick google shows 14.1m people in the Uk have some sort of disability, so everyone probably has a familial relationship with a disabled person.

On the guilt element; i think that’s largely because the disabled approach things in a different way to some other protected characteristics. They don’t get instantly offended about things, and actually introduce an incredible amount of humour into anyone having misconceptions. I find the same with the gay movement.

The reactions to anyone saying anything involving race are instant and many, it feels, are intended to impose shame on the person saying them. You only have to look at the original thread where I had the temerity to question white privilege. I had people instantly question my intelligence and put me on ignore.

One cunt even said I was a bimbo’s new log in!

It’s getting that way with trans.

I think if race and trans equality movements took it the same way as disability and gay movements do/did it, then I think there’d be a much higher quality debate and better empathy all around.

[notfatcat]

Random, if you want to see interesting conversations on race and race relations I would seek out Glenn Loury, Coleman Hughes, John McWhorter, Kmele Foster, Jason Riley, to name a few, if you haven't already.

[Random1]

Random, if you want to see interesting conversations on race and race relations I would seek out Glenn Loury, Coleman Hughes, John McWhorter, Kmele Foster, Jason Riley, to name a few, if you haven't already.

Ta mate.

To be fair, it’s not a rabbit hole I’d intended on falling into. I meandered into learning about racism as a topic because I find post modernism fascinating.

I’ll take a look at what you’ve suggested though

[Tichtheid]

Do you feel as strongly about all prejudice?

Not leading down the garden path here, genuinely interested, as you’ve persevered here long after others have bailed.

I’m talking about the protected characteristics in the equality act.

Do you feel the same about sexism, ageism etc?

Yes I do.

I've focussed on racism here but it's so easy to conflate one area of discrimination with another, especially when people are trying to shed what they feel might be guilt by way of being part of the majority group who are not discriminated against.

For example, there is definite structural discrimination against people who use wheel chairs, you see that in access issues all the time. That is being addressed for the most part and things are getting better, though there is still a way to go.

People don't seem to feel guilty and have knee-jerk reactions to living in an ableist society, even though it's so very easy to see that access issues still exist.

Why don't people try to cover up ablesim as being "just a smokescreen" for classism or economic inequality?


I'm just as prepared to talk about misogyny or homophobia or transphobia or any kind of discrimination, but it's important to not lose focus.

Yeah, they’re slightly different beasts though aren’t they?

Anyone could become disabled tomorrow, and so there’s an increased empathy there. Plus disabled people can barely be called a minority anymore - a quick google shows 14.1m people in the Uk have some sort of disability, so everyone probably has a familial relationship with a disabled person.

On the guilt element; i think that’s largely because the disabled approach things in a different way to some other protected characteristics. They don’t get instantly offended about things, and actually introduce an incredible amount of humour into anyone having misconceptions. I find the same with the gay movement.

The reactions to anyone saying anything involving race are instant and many, it feels, are intended to impose shame on the person saying them. You only have to look at the original thread where I had the temerity to question white privilege. I had people instantly question my intelligence and put me on ignore.

One cunt even said I was a bimbo’s new log in!

It’s getting that way with trans.

I think if race and trans equality movements took it the same way as disability and gay movements do/did it, then I think there’d be a much higher quality debate and better empathy all around.

I'm actually astounded by this post.

Anyone could become "disabled" so there is "an increased empathy there", but no one* can suddenly find themselves inconveniently black, so there is less empathy for people who face racism?
*note the defining factor of the norm is being white in this case, being non-white is the deviation from the norm.


As for the rest, are you really saying that if black people just cheered up and had a laugh about racism, the way "the gays" do about homophobia, everything would be fine?

[Random1]

Yes I do.

I've focussed on racism here but it's so easy to conflate one area of discrimination with another, especially when people are trying to shed what they feel might be guilt by way of being part of the majority group who are not discriminated against.

For example, there is definite structural discrimination against people who use wheel chairs, you see that in access issues all the time. That is being addressed for the most part and things are getting better, though there is still a way to go.

People don't seem to feel guilty and have knee-jerk reactions to living in an ableist society, even though it's so very easy to see that access issues still exist.

Why don't people try to cover up ablesim as being "just a smokescreen" for classism or economic inequality?


I'm just as prepared to talk about misogyny or homophobia or transphobia or any kind of discrimination, but it's important to not lose focus.

Yeah, they’re slightly different beasts though aren’t they?

Anyone could become disabled tomorrow, and so there’s an increased empathy there. Plus disabled people can barely be called a minority anymore - a quick google shows 14.1m people in the Uk have some sort of disability, so everyone probably has a familial relationship with a disabled person.

On the guilt element; i think that’s largely because the disabled approach things in a different way to some other protected characteristics. They don’t get instantly offended about things, and actually introduce an incredible amount of humour into anyone having misconceptions. I find the same with the gay movement.

The reactions to anyone saying anything involving race are instant and many, it feels, are intended to impose shame on the person saying them. You only have to look at the original thread where I had the temerity to question white privilege. I had people instantly question my intelligence and put me on ignore.

One cunt even said I was a bimbo’s new log in!

It’s getting that way with trans.

I think if race and trans equality movements took it the same way as disability and gay movements do/did it, then I think there’d be a much higher quality debate and better empathy all around.

I'm actually astounded by this post.

Anyone could become "disabled" so there is "an increased empathy there", but no one* can suddenly find themselves inconveniently black, so there is less empathy for people who face racism?
*note the defining factor of the norm is being white in this case, being non-white is the deviation from the norm.


As for the rest, are you really saying that if black people just cheered up and had a laugh about racism, the way "the gays" do about homophobia, everything would be fine?

I’m so confused by your post - what I wrote is basic human behaviour.

If you have exposure to something and a vested interest in something, humans are more likely to show empathy. To be fair, that’s an opinion, that I haven’t researched, as I just assumed this was a universal truth - it never occurred to me that anyone wouldn’t agree.

On your second point about laughing at racism - to be very clear; racism or ableism etc is not funny.

However, the gay community, for example, have put non-gay people at ease and established boundaries through the use of humour.

Humour is an excellent way of exploring taboo subjects. Nigel Owens or Gareth Thomas are great examples of putting that in action. It’s also why role models are so important - it’s not just so that other gay people can see their sexuality isn’t a barrier to success (which is really important in and of itself). It also gets the rest of the population used to seeing and hearing things from people different from themselves, so there are fewer barriers. It’s a really nice positive feed back loop.

The interview between Nigel Owens and jiffy a week or two ago was a great example.

In race and trans, there is a really significant focus on language and taking offence at language - your asterisk is an example where you’re picking apart a piece of my language use. I genuinely don’t understand your point on the asterisk - of course white is the norm in my sentence, because it’s generally individuals in the white community who need to be less racist, as white people represent 80+% of the country. I thought we were on the same page there?

Ultimately we’re talking about culture change here, where we move to a Uk in which people are more accepting and empathetic towards people from different backgrounds and challenges.

Culture change only truly happens when a critical mass of people believe in the change. I’m just saying that it feels like gay people and disabled people have taken a different, more humourful, approach to achieving this compared to race and trans.

I’m not actually sure which method will end up being better in the long run. That’ll be for history to decide.

Edit; spelling.

[Random1]

Big report out today in Uk.

It’ll seriously test how much I am interested in the topic, as it’s over 200 pages long!

Summary here on beeb though.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56585538

Tldr version : the report has dug into data sets across Uk and found racism clearly exists in Uk, but little evidence that structural/systemic racism plays a significant role in the Uk.

Moreover, the Uk should be seen as an exemplar for white majority countries.

[assfly]

Big report out today in Uk.

It’ll seriously test how much I am interested in the topic, as it’s over 200 pages long!

Summary here on beeb though.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56585538

Tldr version : the report has dug into data sets across Uk and found racism clearly exists in Uk, but little evidence that structural/systemic racism plays a significant role in the Uk.

Moreover, the Uk should be seen as an exemplar for white majority countries.

Fascinating. Especially these two points:

The Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities, set up after Black Lives Matter protests, found social class and family structure had a bigger impact on how people's lives turned out.

Like I said much earlier in the thread, classism is the major prejudice that extends across the globe and into history and has to be considered when looking at systemic racism.

Children from ethnic communities did as well or better than white pupils in compulsory education, with black Caribbean pupils the only group to perform less well

My wife who is a teacher with experience in public schools in rough neighbourhoods in London has said this for years.

[robmatic]

Big report out today in Uk.

It’ll seriously test how much I am interested in the topic, as it’s over 200 pages long!

Summary here on beeb though.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56585538

Tldr version : the report has dug into data sets across Uk and found racism clearly exists in Uk, but little evidence that structural/systemic racism plays a significant role in the Uk.

Moreover, the Uk should be seen as an exemplar for white majority countries.

It's interesting that they are recommending getting rid of BAME. Always struck me as people wanting to say 'coloured' or non-white but be polite about it.

If we moved back to the UK, my wife would technically be BAME but as a privately-educated Muslim born and raised overseas and who would pass as a white European, she has literally nothing in common with a working class Afro-Caribbean bloke born in London.

[JM2K6]

Government marking its own homework again, I see. This was the commission - set up by someone who explicitly claims that institutional racism does not exist - that everyone said would be a whitewash.

In 2017, Mirza condemned an audit of racial inequalities in public services commissioned by Theresa May, writing that it showed how “anti-racism is becoming weaponised across the political spectrum”.

It is understood Mirza had initially hoped to involve Trevor Phillips, the former chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, who had referred to UK Muslims as being “a nation within a nation”, as a member of the new body. Her eventual choice to chair the commission, Tony Sewell, has also previously questioned the effects of institutional racism.

fucking lol

same week as the "police did a fine job in Clapham, no case to answer there, they had to break it up because they were too close together and therefore breaking COVID regulations [what do you mean we kettled them]" report

[I like neeps]

The school attainment is attached to economic inequality isn't surprising and equally the Tories are making it worse. So not sure the "don't worry, it's as bad for low income white kids" is the message they want to broadcast.

Anyway the reviews are pointless this is the fifth in five years and nothing changes anyway.

[Tichtheid]

Government marking its own homework again, I see. This was the commission - set up by someone who explicitly claims that institutional racism does not exist - that everyone said would be a whitewash.

In 2017, Mirza condemned an audit of racial inequalities in public services commissioned by Theresa May, writing that it showed how “anti-racism is becoming weaponised across the political spectrum”.

It is understood Mirza had initially hoped to involve Trevor Phillips, the former chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, who had referred to UK Muslims as being “a nation within a nation”, as a member of the new body. Her eventual choice to chair the commission, Tony Sewell, has also previously questioned the effects of institutional racism.

fucking lol

same week as the "police did a fine job in Clapham, no case to answer there, they had to break it up because they were too close together and therefore breaking COVID regulations [what do you mean we kettled them]" report

Yeah there were a couple of commentators on tv news this morning saying the report was a load of old bollocks (I'm paraphrasing), one of them said something along the lines of "if you commission someone who doesn't believe something exists in the first place, it's not surprising they come to that conclusion"

This from last June;

The Institute of Race Relations thinktank said it would be hard to have confidence in the commission’s outcomes.

“Any enquiry into inequality has to acknowledge structural and systemic factors. Munira Mirza’s previous comments describe a ‘grievance culture’ within the anti-racist field and she has previously argued that institutional racism is ‘a perception more than a reality’,” a spokesperson said. “It is difficult to have any confidence in policy recommendations from someone who denies the existence of the very structures that produce the social inequalities experienced by black communities.”

[JM2K6]

As neeps says, there's been plenty of these before. David Lammy's report on the police & judicial systems in 2017, for example. They ignored his findings and didn't implement any of his recommendations. Still, he speaks very well when dealing with callers on LBC who claim he cannot be English and people like him are "polluting the world".

Mirza's a Spiked contributer, which closes the circle quite nicely.

[Tichtheid]

As neeps says, there's been plenty of these before. David Lammy's report on the police & judicial systems in 2017, for example. They ignored his findings and didn't implement any of his recommendations. Still, he speaks very well when dealing with callers on LBC who claim he cannot be English and people like him are "polluting the world".

Mirza's a Spiked contributer, which closes the circle quite nicely.

It's quite the career arc, from the Revolutionary Communist Party, to deputy Mayor to Johnson to hardline Brexiteer to Director of No10 Policy Unit.

[Slick]

Any enquiry into inequality has to acknowledge structural and systemic factors.

Why is this any different? Is this not giving the answers before the enquiry?

[SaintK]

As neeps says, there's been plenty of these before. David Lammy's report on the police & judicial systems in 2017, for example. They ignored his findings and didn't implement any of his recommendations. Still, he speaks very well when dealing with callers on LBC who claim he cannot be English and people like him are "polluting the world".

Mirza's a Spiked contributer, which closes the circle quite nicely.

The commission selected by Mirza and chaired by a former advisor to Johnson ends up reporting how Downing St wanted it to................no shit!!!

The language contained in the precis appears to mirror much of the thinking of Munira Mirza, the head of the Downing Street policy unit, who is seen as a particular influence on Boris Johnson on race and other cultural issues. Mirza, who oversaw the appointment of the commission panel, is a longtime and outspoken critic of previous government attempts to tackle structural factors behind racial inequality.

[I like neeps]

Ailibhe Rae the Politics Correspondent for the New Statesman makes the point this review did what it was meant to. Have people argue about the definition of racism rather than the policy points they want to introduce to improve equality.

It's a shame they're patting themselves on the back for not being racist according to themselves as white kids from low economic areas also struggle rather than celebrating ideas that try to solve the problems.

But that's politics. Actually doing stuff doesn't matter it's all about what you brief to the press.

[Insane_Homer]

[I like neeps]

How on earth does slavery get a positive spin in a report in 2021?!

[Fangle]

Dead Tigers says we mustn’t group the Afro-Carribeans with the African Americans. But anecdotally they seem to do rather well in the States.

[Biffer]

How on earth does slavery get a positive spin in a report in 2021?!

Anyone who votes for these arseholes knowing this is a racist.

[Lobby]

Any enquiry into inequality has to acknowledge structural and systemic factors.

Why is this any different? Is this not giving the answers before the enquiry?

The problem with this report, and indeed it seems any debate on race at the moment, is that views are so polarized that both sides are only interested in having their existing beliefs confirmed, and anything that seeks to challenge those views is immediately attacked as wrong.

[Insane_Homer]

[Marylandolorian]

Dead Tigers says we mustn’t group the Afro-Carribeans with the African Americans. But anecdotally they seem to do rather well in the States.

Yes, they are helping each other a lot via their strong communities, the black-Americans don’t.

I’ll take DT comments with grain of salt, as he came to the US illegally, got his green card and has been a staunch critic of the country since then.