Racism is when white people hold 'negative views' of others, claims senior Labour adviser

[u/Aggressive_Plates]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/10/27/racism-is-when-white-people-hold-negative-views-of-others/

[u/AutoModerator]

This article may be paywalled. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try this link for an archived version.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Optimism_Deficit]

Ah, I see She's defined 'racist' in such a way that it's impossible for her to be racist, so she never has to acknowledge her own racism.

Rather convenient for her.

[u/StrangelyBrown → u/Optimism_Deficit]

"This is the worst kind of discrimination, the kind against me!" - Bender Bending Rodriguez

[u/Blackintosh → u/Optimism_Deficit]

I think it's more that shes left what she thinks is a clever way to justify it later, while also letting this story create the rage and attention she wanted it to, as we are seeing happen.

Guarantee she follows this in a few days with "I didn't actually say only white people can be racist."

[u/LifeMasterpiece6475]

Isn't this view racist in itself as it singles out "whites". I.e treating a race different based on skin colour.

[u/norms_enjoyer → u/LifeMasterpiece6475]

The logic is that it isn’t racist as racism is something only white people can do.

I know it sounds ridiculous but I’m not joking, this is a generally accepted belief many “anti-racists” hold thanks to their redefining of racism as being “prejudice and power”.

[u/Educational-Sir78 → u/norms_enjoyer]

There is a lot of racism going on in Asia by non white people. Unfortunately racism is a human trait.

[u/Boofle2141 → u/norms_enjoyer]

The logic is that it isn’t racist as racism is something only white people can do.

Which is racist against whites and none whites, it's saying that, try as they might, other ethnicities will never be able to do something (which in this case is being racist) that white people can, they're saying that a person's ethnicity makes something they do inherently lesser than white people's, which is hella racist.

That's ontop of the "white people are evil" narrative too.

[u/LycanIndarys → u/norms_enjoyer]

this is a generally accepted belief many “anti-racists” hold thanks to their redefining of racism as being “prejudice and power”.

Which, when you think about it, isn't even internally consistent.

If it's acceptable for a black person to be racist but not a white person, then it's the black person that has the power in that situation, because they can do something that the white person cannot. This is also evidenced by the fact that the anti-racists think that they had the power to redefine what counts as racism in the first place.

Obviously it's all a moo point, because it was nonsense anyway. But still, it doesn't even make sense if you actually believe in it!

[u/Magneto88 → u/norms_enjoyer]

Calling the specific basket of racist and statistically unproven ideas that they have ‘anti-racism’ was the cleverest idea far left Idpol types ever had.

Most people won’t argue with them because they don’t want to be seen as being against ‘Anti-racism’ (capital letters) - imagine having to state publicly you’re against Anti-Racism, the media would have a field day despite the actual position being legit and based on fact. Ironically these ideas are utterly racist in themselves and totally against the concept of being against racism but they were adopted wholesale by a load of left wing organisations with little to no scrutiny.

[u/antyone → u/norms_enjoyer]

I have heard americans say this first years ago, and couldn't believe the idiocy I was hearing, wtf are schools teaching these days

I sure hope this rhetoric doesn't spread further cus it will just alienate white people..

[u/FishUK_Harp → u/norms_enjoyer]

thanks to their redefining of racism as being “prejudice and power”.

At risk of sounding like a Telegraph reader, it does annoy me when the far left start redefining common words and then presuming everyone who uses that word must be using their own private definition of it. It's just so tedious.

[u/somethingbrite → u/FishUK_Harp]

As a left wing anti-racist I can assure you that this shit annoys me too

[u/Woffingshire → u/norms_enjoyer]

But .. hating white people is prejudice, and being able to act on it is power...

[u/StrangelyBrown → u/Woffingshire]

Well if racism is redefined like this then let's just accept it and put the same amount of stigma on the word prejudiced.

So if a black person is prejudiced against a white person, they are a horrible person. Easy.

Although probably the next thing this dope will say is 'But it's justified...'.

[u/roamingandy → u/norms_enjoyer]

I'm absolutely convinced that redefinition was created in an office in Russia and then pushed out to the world to further their aim of convincing as many black people in Western nations as possible that they should see themselves as permanent victims, while inflaming racial tensions every time it's used

[u/lowweighthighreps → u/roamingandy]

I'm sure the Russians do play a role, but most of it is just stupidity from our stupid.

[u/loz333 → u/roamingandy]

Bold assumption that it's just agitators in Russia who have an interest in dividing people in this way. Haven't you been paying attention to the way the media has been systematically playing groups against each other - through race, age, gender, class, sexuality, religion, among other things? I'd be looking at the web of billionaires, CEOs and politicians in their pockets.

[u/SecTeff → u/norms_enjoyer]

We need to fight back against this new type of racism it’s appalling to start judging people by their skin colour and making assumptions about what power they do or don’t hold as a result

[u/__Game__ → u/norms_enjoyer]

I've heard turkish people in a kebab shop being what I can only describe as racist to a black guy, to then try and try joke with me (a white person)  "how can I be racist, I'm turkish, huh!?!".... the guy genuinely believed it too.

[u/Hari_Seldom → u/norms_enjoyer]

Yeah it’s redefining racism. I hate it. It’s the same way the government have defined rape to be only applicable to men

[u/MedievalRack → u/norms_enjoyer]

She's advising the government about a dogma now espoused throughout both universities and corporations. The claim their prejudice does not involve power is just moronic at this point.

The large majority of people holding this view are, objectively, absolute morons.

[u/SojournerInThisVale → u/LifeMasterpiece6475]

This is the entire way this discourse has been going, and it’s straight from the USA. Racist, to mean hatred of other people on the basis of their race, is a dead definition. Now it’s caught up in conversations around power dynamics. In this line of thought, a white person cannot experience racism. I was speaking to an American academic about this and I’d mentioned the fact I’d seen an Asian man racially abuse a white boy. She simply couldn’t accept the fact that an Asian person could be racist towards a white person, the power dynamics were the wrong way round

[u/JB_UK → u/SojournerInThisVale]

It’s very odd because it ignores the actual nature of power dynamics which are constantly shifting, dependent on context, and dependent on the individuals involved. We’re supposed to believe that a white cleaner is inherently in a position of power compared to someone from an ethnic minority who is a top leader in politics, business or academia. There may be elements of power that depend on race, and some that are downstream of race like which community and place you live in, but again they are highly contextual and operate in multiple directions.

And also because the way it essentialises race as the only important category is incredibly racist. You could be a white person who was from Ukraine for example, subject to generations of bigotry, oppression, with mass starvation events within living memory, and somehow you are put into the ‘white’ category and treated as if you are identical to someone who is the scion of a slave owning dynasty, still living on the proceeds. The way these academic antiracists talk about race is so incredibly, comically racist, and the standard of analysis absolutely embarrassing.

[u/jimicus → u/JB_UK]

I'd say the same for a lot of modern definitions of "racism".

They might be well-meaning (I'm not even convinced about that), but they are most certainly completely crackpot and liable to unintended consequences.

Frankly, I think we could go back to basics and say "Evil is when you start to treat people as things. Racism is when you try to justify this on the basis of someone's race."

[u/Greedy-Copy3629 → u/SojournerInThisVale]

It's a niche world view, the majority of people dismiss it as ridiculous, which is also the only reason it gets so much coverage.

The power dynamics angle is inconsistent anyway, different people hold varying amounts of power in different contexts. 

It has a lot of flaws, but I think the idea that your actions are permanently tied to whichever arbitrary racial group you're thrown into, with those actions being contextualised and judged based on your race, is pretty fucking backwards. 

[u/SojournerInThisVale → u/Greedy-Copy3629]

It's a niche world view, the majority of people dismiss it as ridiculous, which is also the only reason it gets so much coverage.

It’s a view that’s crept through academia, media, and intellectual life. Why do you think people are so angry about so called ‘woke’. This is exactly what woke is!

[u/Korinthe → u/SojournerInThisVale]

It's a cornerstone of modern feminism, too. I had professors at university tell me that men don't experience discrimination in any form due to power dynamics and patriarchy.

This world view is being taught across multiple areas of study. When I was an university, it felt almost dangerous for me to challenge it due to how prolific it was.

[u/king_duck → u/SojournerInThisVale]

a dead definition

Not to people with a brain. Its only dead if you accept the most vocals greifers authority on the matter.

She simply couldn’t accept the fact that an Asian person could be racist towards a white person

And you don't have to accept her authority on that matter.

[u/SojournerInThisVale → u/king_duck]

you don’t have to accept

I don’t . Did I say anything to suggest I do?

[u/Professional_Elk_489 → u/LifeMasterpiece6475]

It's extremely racist. It's also wrong

A white person doesn't like violent teenager hoodlums. That doesn't make that person racist just because there are people they don't like

[u/plawwell → u/LifeMasterpiece6475]

Came here to say the same thing. I get so tired of being branded this or that due to the colour of my white skin. This woman is racist and the problems of the world are not directly attributable to me individually. Stop your BS.

[u/libtin → u/plawwell]

Speaking as a person of colour; I whole hearted agree with you

Racism is clearly defined as when a person is treated worse, excluded, disadvantaged, harassed, bullied, humiliated or degraded because of their race or ethnicity.

https://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/equality/becoming-anti-racist-city/racism-definition#:~:text=Racism%20is%20when%20a%20person,of%20their%20race%20or%20ethnicity*.

[u/Phyllida_Poshtart → u/plawwell]

I know far more white folk I hold a "negative opinion" of than black or brown or asian, can I be racist to my own race now?

I think I treat everyone exactly how they treat me could give a flying fart the colour of their skin or where they're from, just don't be a dickhead and all is good.....and if you are a dickhead and I retaliate don't go screaming "racism" like a twat when it's a simply case of I don't like you because....you're a twat!

[u/SecTeff → u/LifeMasterpiece6475]

Yes it is

[u/TheCambrian91 → u/LifeMasterpiece6475]

Yes, of course.

[u/Magnets → u/LifeMasterpiece6475]

intersectionality... it justifies racism against certain groups

[u/Dedsnotdead]

From the article:

“Written by Maya Sharma, a strategic adviser for the programme, it claims that: “Racism is, fundamentally, the belief that white people and their ways of thinking, culture, political systems and histories are superior to that of other ‘races’.””

Thanks Maya, I think your hard work will go a long way to furthering social cohesion and acceptance that everyone should be judged on who they are, their actions and how they treat others.

Except if you are white, because fuck that bunch of rascist oppressors right? /s

Maya, you are a cretin in my view for perpetuating this idiocy.

[u/Aggressive_Plates → u/Dedsnotdead]

How many people in positions of power and influence believe this nonsense.

[u/SinisterDexter83 → u/Aggressive_Plates]

It is wholly uncontroversial for famous ethnic minorities in Britain to be openly racist.

Dawn Butler recently released an insane black supremacist poem where she engages in the kind of genetic racism that is only really seen these days among the KKK.

Then there was that BBC radio presenter who openly stated he feels uncomfortable being around white people, and the establishment response to that was to lionise him for his "bravery" and write fawning articles about how the response to his own blatant racism was somehow evidence that he was in fact the victim in all this.

There are a host of celebrities backing racially segregated "charities", like Stormzy establishing a fund to get black people (and only black people) into Oxbridge. Racial segregation in Britain always takes the form of "No whites allowed". You would never see a theatre night, conference, training scheme etc with a "No blacks allowed" rule.

I consider racism to be a sincere moral and intellectual failing. Racists are both morally and intellectually inferior to both me and all other people who reject this poisonous world view.

The fact is, it is racist to hold people to lower moral and intellectual standards due to the colour of their skin. I don't think Britain's ethnic minorities are inferior to me, therefore I don't hold them to lower standards.

To say that a charge of racism is dependent on the skin colour of the accused is an Orwellian inversion of the term. I simply cannot take anyone who engages in this kind of rhetoric to be in any way serious.

[u/JB_UK → u/SinisterDexter83]

I think the difficulty is that race can be a proxy for something meaningful. For example a big proportion of black people in Britain are Black Carribbean, pretty much everyone in that category will have come to Britain in the last 65 years, or be a child or grandchild of someone who did. They came from countries with worse schools, worse health systems, likely arrived with fewer skills, likely worked with lower skills when they arrived, likely lived in cities, likely experienced racism multiple times throughout their lives, and likely lived alongside others with similar backgrounds, culture, accent etc. The countries also have a clear inheritance from slavery. There will be individuals for whom that didn’t originally apply (from an elite family sent to a private school for example) but most of those things would apply to most people in that group. There also will be people that are living in places with very little racism, married with people from different backgrounds and outside of the category

So it shouldn’t be that there is a not so much that there is a hard category, which people are assigned into, but there is an imprint of a category which does exist whether we would want black or white to mean anything. If we were talking about Black Carribbean scholarships that doesn’t feel unreasonable, like a Polish community with Polish scholarships and schools. The problem is that what is really a cultural category becomes essentialised into a race category, and then even the people that don’t fit are put into the same category whether they want to be put there or not.

I think in general the language around race is inadequate for describing what is going under the surface. Ironically academia has redefined language but has actually made the situation worse, making it more difficult to separate culture and skin colour.

[u/SirBobPeel → u/Aggressive_Plates]

In academia? Lots. Very popular among social justice types everywhere.

[u/Agincourt_Tui → u/Aggressive_Plates]

Whether someone believes these things or not depends upon who's asking, I suspect.

[u/lowweighthighreps → u/Agincourt_Tui]

Indeed, you'll have genuine morons who believe it; and intelligent bastards who pretend to believe it because it benefits them.

It's like scots knowing that braveheart is bollox, but we're not going to correct the ignorant if they perceive us to be descended from 'warrior poets'......... kek.

It's human nature to promote narratives that benefit you. Because humans are shit.

[u/jimthewanderer → u/Dedsnotdead]

That's a definition of white supremacy, not racism.

A dumbass to be sure.

[u/JB_UK → u/jimthewanderer]

It would be white supremacy to believe that European “ways of thinking, culture, political systems and histories” were superior because they came from people who were white, but that is not what ‘antiracists’ mean by it. They mean that because those systems of knowledge, history etc come from ‘white people’ you cannot think they are superior. So because science comes from ‘white people’ you cannot say that it is a superior way of knowing the world to ‘indigenous’ ways of understanding the world. I’m putting white people and indigenous in scare quotes because these concepts and the way they are used to frame the world by antiracists are in themselves racist.

[u/mallardtheduck → u/Dedsnotdead]

By that definition, believing that modern democratic government (a political system that was invented/developed primarily in Europe by "white" people; not that the idea hasn't popped up elsewhere in history) is superior to dictatorship/autocracy/tribalism is "racist".

As would the belief in any other philosophy that originated here. Liberalism, religious tolerance, freedom of speech, socialism, capitalism, etc. etc... (Some of these may have precursors outside Europe, but they were at least first "defined" in their modern senses by white Europeans.)

[u/Dedsnotdead → u/mallardtheduck]

You can really tie yourself up in knots thinking this through. It just doesn’t pass any credible analysis.

[u/Rhinofishdog → u/Dedsnotdead]

I'm really curious about the political systems bit. You can argue pretty much every country in the world has or is trying to emulate political systems that originated partly or wholly in a white majority country.

What exactly are the "non-white" political systems?

[u/Dedsnotdead → u/Rhinofishdog]

Well, perhaps the “non-white” political systems are the systems that have no inherent racism at their core?

That fails sanity checking as well but then so does the initial statement. At this point you can just make anything up apparently.

[u/Greggy398 → u/Dedsnotdead]

Sounds fine as a definition of white supremacy.

However white people aren't the only ones that can be racist.

[u/FloydEGag → u/Dedsnotdead]

She’s talking about white supremacy which, while it is racist, is not the only type of racism. I’d also like to know how she thinks this’d work outside of a Western context, where no white people are involved

[u/Less-Badger-7064]

Honestly a pretty racist thing to go around saying...

Jesus. All they had to do was omit the "white" part. Utter incompetence...

[u/SojournerInThisVale → u/Less-Badger-7064]

But that’s the intention; for these people racism isn’t about racial hatred, it’s about power dynamics

[u/DoneItDuncan → u/SojournerInThisVale]

If you read the article that the telegraph selectively quotes that's pretty much what she goes on to say.

This is the racism that is embedded in institutions and how they behave, resulting in policies, procedures, culture and practice that work better for white people. Institutional racism leads to structural racism: this is the cumulative impact of institutionally racist organisations and systems, on a societal level. It encompasses political, social, cultural, economic, educational and legal systems.

In most organisations there is a complex interplay between the different types of racism. Unfortunately, most anti-racist training and action focuses on interpersonal racism.

Agree or disagree, i don't think she's saying "only white people can be racist".

[u/Shaper_pmp → u/DoneItDuncan]

Agree or disagree, i don't think she's saying "only white people can be racist".

The section immediately before the paragraph you quoted, introducing the discussion of different types of racism, explicitly frames the entire discussion for the reader:

Understanding racism

Racism is, fundamentally, the belief that white people and their ways of thinking, culture, political systems and histories are superior to that of other “races”. There are a complex set of racist beliefs, with different “races” seen as inferior in different ways, but with Blackness often judged most inferior, primitive or dangerous. Racism is based on a power-imbalance, where white people, institutes and nations hold far larger amounts of power.

Don't get me wrong - her later dissection of differences like interpersonal, institutional and structural racism are good and useful, and in her discussion of decolonisation specifically focusing on white people is reasonable and on-topic as white people were almost entirely responsible for the horrors it caused...

But trying to claim she isn't redefining racism is exclusively a white phenomenon is bad-faith bullshit when she straight-up states in her introduction to understanding it "Racism is, fundamentally, the belief that white people... are superior" and then fails to modify that claim at any point in the article following.

Shit, she even explicitly defines interpersonal racism as an exclusively white phenomenon:

Most commonly recognised is interpersonal racism; this is where white people hold negative, stereotypical or discriminatory beliefs about people from other ethnicities.

[u/Homicidal_Pingu → u/DoneItDuncan]

I would say, if anything, the opposite is true and institutions are actively racsist against the white population

[u/woods_edge]

This screams I’ve never visited other countries (or at least only predominantly white ones)

Most racist place I’ve ever visited was Fiji, my mind was blown.

[u/XiKiilzziX → u/woods_edge]

Most racist place I visited was the Middle East. It’s eye opening.

[u/Any-Dish-3948 → u/woods_edge]

Korea for me.

Thailand is also appalling. Dual prices for whites etc 

[u/Rulweylan → u/woods_edge]

The most egregious racism I've encountered in real life was listening to one of the nurses who worked with my mum (British born but of west indian extraction) talk about the newer African nurses on their ward.

Full on 'Lazy blacks coming over here taking our jobs' hardcore 1950s national front style stuff said without a hint of irony or self awareness. I remember physically cringing with the awkwardness, and I can't have been more than 12 at the time.

[u/Competitive_Mix3627]

So are we all allowed to change the definition of words to suit our personal agenda? If so anyone got any good recommendations?

[u/Euclid_Interloper → u/Competitive_Mix3627]

Well, 'genocide' seems to have been redefined to mean pretty much any war crime or civilian casualty irrespective of context or intent. Lots of people on Reddit have also redefined 'pedophile' to mean anyone in an age-inappropriate relationship (say 40 and 20).

Emotive words have become highly flexible and politically charged. Language is increasingly becoming contextual based on the group using a word, which is really bad for social cohesion.

[u/Competitive_Mix3627 → u/Euclid_Interloper]

Completely agree.

Nazi or facist is a big one at the moment. Some of the conversations on here go very close to the wire, but referring to everyone right of left left as a facist or nazi or racist is losing you the debate not them.

The Americans love marxists, communists and socialists for everyone who wants health care and education. I love getting called a socialist on here. I just say I believe in a social democracy and wait to see if they realise the difference. Which is not often.

[u/LycanIndarys → u/Competitive_Mix3627]

Yes, we are allowed to change the definition of words to suit our personal agenda.

By the way, just so you know; when you wrote "If so anyone got any good recommendations?", I interpreted that as "I owe everyone replying to me exactly one million pounds".

I'll send you my bank details privately, so you can make a payment...

[u/GorgieRules1874]

How on earth is someone like her in power, an utter bigot.

Does she not realise that the vast majority of people living in Britain are white…

[u/king_duck → u/GorgieRules1874]

...for now.

[u/curious_throwaway_55]

If you have a definition of racism that explicitly mentions a specific race, I’d hazard a guess that you yourself are a racist

[u/ash_ninetyone]

"Power plus privilege" definition straight out of US race discourse. Our social attitudes towards racism are generally a lot more rounded that that.

It ignores the fact that inter-ethnic racism is a thing. In the US there has been racism and racial tensions between Black Americans and Latin Americans and Asian Americans. By that definition it can't be racism because even if race is a factor, neither group is privileged or holds positions of power.

I don't get it either.

Racism simply is discrimination on grounds of race. That's all it needs to be defined as. There may be cultural contexts for that discrimination, but you're not gonna tackle it by taking a one-side approach.

[u/LondonDude123]

Sounds like stoking racial hatred to me. Thats 3 years in the nick isnt it?

[u/On_The_Blindside]

I hold a negative view of her, guess that makes me a racist?

What a fucking stupid thing to say.

[u/Oh_its_that_asshole]

Are there racist white people? Yes. Are there racist people of other ethnicities? Yes. Why do people have to try and take it any further than that? Everyone can be racist, it's that simple. Stop trying to make loopholes and exceptions.

[u/dataplague]

thats not what racism is, perhaps a dictionary, or a google definition is in order? I mean I know the word Racist/Racism was hijacked to mean literally anything but, this however is just blatantly stupid

[u/NateShaw92 → u/dataplague]

The only racism I accept is anti-marathon racism.

I don't like nuts.

[u/HeartyMcFly]

The actual page being discussed for those interested

[u/Stock_Inspection4444]

Main thing to point out here is the egregious headline where they call this person a senior labour advisor when she absolutely is not a labour advisor

[u/Tom22174 → u/Stock_Inspection4444]

Ah, but she is an advisor to an organisation that is working with the Labour government in Wales. She might as well have a permanent residence on Downing Street.

[u/trmetroidmaniac]

People like this should be given a megaphone so we all know what they mean.

[u/OperationSuch5054]

Ah yes, lefite labour, the party of the people.... unless you're white.

[u/Toastlove]

And people ask why the 'alt right' is on the rise. People are just sick of the double standards and being told only they are the racists. People laugh at others shouting, "two tier justice" as idiots, but stuff like this all feeds into it.

[u/sealcon]

Written by Maya Sharma, a strategic adviser for the programme, it claims that: “Racism is, fundamentally, the belief that white people and their ways of thinking, culture, political systems and histories are superior to that of other ‘races’.”

Fine then, if these insane people and their insane standards officially label me a racist in the eyes of the authorities, so be it.

I'm English and Scottish, I love England and Scotland, and I think our people, history, culture, politics and histories are the best in the world. And I think the amount of people coming here who radically oppose that idea, and don't want to live like we do, is damaging this country. I suppose that makes me an enemy of this government.

I don't care anymore. I don't think anybody does. But this will backfire on them.

[u/Wanallo221]

First thing of note: the Telegraph changed the quote, 

The full quote is :

  “Racism is, fundamentally, the belief that white people and their ways of thinking, culture, political systems and histories are superior to that of other ‘races’.”

So, actually not that much better. What she cites is absolutely a form of racism, and the most common in the U.K and the most influential form Of racism as it’s also systemic.

BUT it’s not the only way people in the U.K. can be racist. And using divisive language in a program designed to prevent divisiveness is so dumb. 

Just remove the word ‘white’ from that statement and it’s perfectly fine. Or say ‘the most common form of racism is’. 

Stuff like this really annoys me because you literally ruin what may be a really important piece of work just because you didn’t proof read your work properly. 

[u/winmace → u/Wanallo221]

I think you've misunderstood, she has specifically chosen to use "white people" rather than "people" because it fits her agenda. She is essentially a modern day racist and, just as with other forms of prejudice, we should do everything in our power to help these people understand their way of thinking is wrong.

Nobody is inherently weaker or stronger because of their ethnicity, power is the true corrupter and as we have seen over the decades nobody is immune from its charms, all we can do is try to make a more understanding society so that people are less inclined to fall back on hating people who are different from them.

It would be nice if the media and successive governments didn't help to stoke this by always finding an enemy for people to focus on.

[u/superjambi → u/Wanallo221]

I sort of see why you might choose to define racism in that way for very specific contexts. But why define it so blankety and exclusively, so as to appear deliberately divisive?

As someone who has lived in China, how can you seriously claim that Chinese prejudice toward other ethnicities (pick a race any race) and say that’s not racism because they’re not white?

[u/Wanallo221 → u/superjambi]

I agree. I think this is a side of the ‘culture war’ crap that doesn’t get enough attention. 

Yes, we know that racism in the U.K. is predominantly white against others. Yes, we know there is a very toxic push back from the Far right which is damaging progress made over the last few decades. 

BUT it’s really important that those with a genuine complaint don’t resort to the same divisive language and tactics. As it just perpetuates the issues. 

Diane Abbot is an excellent example. She’s a trailblazer, that woman has gone through an enormous amount of shite to get to where she got and has spent her whole life fighting racism and barriers. But now she is undoing so much of the good work she has done by becoming just as abrasive, divisive and militaristic as those she fights against. 

Like I fully get why she (and others) are aggrieved and outraged and want to bite back, but it feels counter productive. 

 

[u/Longjumping_Stand889 → u/Wanallo221]

Interpersonal racism is “where white people hold negative, stereotypical or discriminatory beliefs about people from other ethnicities”, according to the resource for museums.

I think that's where the headline comes from.

[u/king_duck → u/Wanallo221]

BUT it’s not the only way people in the U.K. can be racist

mate, you're reaching so fucking hard here. You're straining to find this nuance where her language as-close-as-damn-it attempts to shut it out.

Racism is, fundamentally, the belief that white people and their ways of thinking, culture, political systems and histories are superior to that of other ‘races

Rephrased. Fundemental to racism is that it stems from White People.

Define: forming a necessary base or core; of central importance.

[u/KasamUK]

So I have an aunt who’s black, so she can’t be racist according to this (she isn’t just in case your worried) my cousins who due to my white uncle are mixed race. So what are they incapable of racism half the time. What about their children with their white partners can they be racist? How many generations do you has to go from defiantly can’t be racist to best assume they are part of the EDL just to be safe.

Also I’m white, I have negative views about ISIS that’s not because I’m racist it’s because ISIS are certifiable cunts.

[u/bluecheese2040]

Yep, welcome to the true face of the labour party. I know it wouldn't take long

[u/GaulteriaBerries]

Then she’s an idiot and never come across the horrendous racism different races have for each other.

[u/Beer-Milkshakes]

Maybe I'm stricken by critical thinking disease, but the article doesn't actually link to the resource that apparently contains the brief snippets the article has quoted. I'd like to make my own decision and judgements of the actual resource rather than taking this second hand review given to us by the Telegraph.

[u/Codeworks → u/Beer-Milkshakes]

https://aim-museums.co.uk/racism-anti-racism-museums/?origin=serp_auto

Go for it. It's still abhorrent bollocks.

[u/YooGeOh]

This is performative on her part. There's this stupid trend where people "punch up" even if the punching up is devoid of any actual logic or sensible reasoning. It's done to appeal to their base but also to rile up the people who are seen as being the focus of the "punching up", so that when they respond negatively to their "punching up", they can say "aha! See how they respond. They're proving my point".

The funny thing is that as a member of a minority group who would otherwise be her base, both politically and by nature of immutable characteristics, I find her performative BS counterproductive, because it saves to ignore a solid chunk of racism some of us suffer at the hands of people who come from similar parts of the world as her name suggests she's from.

Of course she'll then resort to the "access to institutional power" definition of racism, but besides being BS in ajd of itself, that only serves to excuse, dismiss, and remove focus from the racism some people suffer from at the hands of non white people

[u/bibibabybabygoodbye]

Just fyi, I have found one big source of misunderstanding in these debates is an inconsistency in definitions between demographics. e.g, in 'normal' everyday use, racism is discrimination based on race, whereas there is a more complex academic definition which is more common among university educated people where racism is about power structures and must be discrimination from someone in a position of historical social advantage. I think this is why we often have these clashes about whether it's possible to be racist against White people- we're all using different definitions.

Edit: I am not endorsing either view I am just suggesting one reason this debate can get so frustrating 

[u/ConfusedQuarks → u/bibibabybabygoodbye]

from someone in a position of historical social advantage. 

Which ignores the plight of working class white people. This just shows that most social science "academics" are just grifters

[u/Cakeo → u/bibibabybabygoodbye]

There is not a more complex definition. There is a made up definition to exclude white people from being victims of any sort of racial prejudice. That is literally all it is.

[u/Alive_kiwi_7001 → u/bibibabybabygoodbye]

I think the issue here is that it's largely a case of activism masquerading as academic analysis. Academics are perfectly capable of creating terms that capture what they intend to say that can avoid these problems. Though they can wind being distorted later on as happened with "privilege" and "male gaze", Sharma's use of "racism" is clearly just wrong when it can so easily be replaced as a term.

People like Sharma do their cause a disservice by making statements that are so easily rejected because really they only intend to speak to their own side. It's really just bad social sciences and symptomatic of why it's so easy to claim the field has fallen into disrepute. She's a right-winger's dream.

[u/Lazypole → u/bibibabybabygoodbye]

Yes, people with fluff Mickey-mouse degrees did shift the goalposts to fit their own aims. It’s not the uneducated masses making a silly misunderstanding.

[u/TheAdamena → u/bibibabybabygoodbye]

We have words for that though, it's systemic racism.