UK dealing with problems the same way my wife does… Ignore them until they magically fix themselves.
5 Likes
I think it’s entirely fair to criticise the findings of the report but if you do so by reference to the ethnicity of the authors you’re part of the problem.
Is that a fair summary of the criticism? Calling someone an uncle tom is an accusation of a self-interested commitment to the status quo, not a reference to their ethnicity per se. This distinction needs to be very carefully preserved, because it IS a tactic on the right to hide from accusation of racism by presenting token minorities completely willing to Uncle Tom themselves.
2 Likes
I’m not sure how you talk about a divisive figure like Tony Sewell - A man who is reviled amongst black people because of his longstanding denial of structural racism, and opinion that black people just have to try harder - without acknowledging that his opinions are very much out of step with his racial peers. There are unpleasant words for that, which I won’t say, but that’s basically the point.
Great post but let’s not forget. Why was the report commissioned in the first place?
I see @cynicaloldgit has beaten me to the punch again although he has a more concise answer than I do.
1 Like
On Wednesday we released our report into race and ethnic disparities in the UK. In it we stated categorically that “we take the reality of racism seriously and we do not deny that it is a real force in the UK”. We also said our report sought to “approach the issues of racial and ethnic disparities in a balanced way, highlighting both the success stories that the data reveals as well as delving into what lies beneath some of the most persistent and enduring ones”. We are pleased that so many people are engaging seriously with the ideas and evidence we have presented.
The facts and analysis we presented challenge a number of strongly held beliefs about the nature and extent of racism in Britain today. Sadly, however, in some cases fair and robust disagreement with the Commission’s work has tipped into misrepresentation. This misrepresentation risks undermining the purpose of the report – understanding and addressing the causes of inequality in the UK – and any of the positive work that results from it. For that reason, it is necessary to set the record straight.
We have never said that racism does not exist in society or in institutions. We say the contrary: racism is real and we must do more to tackle it. That is why our very first recommendation to the Government is to challenge racist and discriminatory action and increase funding to the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) to pursue investigations. We reaffirm the Macpherson definition of institutional racism, though we did not find conclusive evidence that it exists in the areas we examined. However, we said that “both the reality and the perception of unfairness matter”, which is why our recommendations are underpinned by four themes – to build trust, promote fairness, create agency and to achieve inclusivity.
There has also been a wilful misrepresentation by some people of the Commission’s view on the history of slavery. The idea that the Commission would downplay the atrocities of slavery is as absurd as it is offensive to every one of us. The report merely says that in the face of the inhumanity of slavery, African people preserved their humanity and culture. The Commission’s recommendation for Government to create inclusive curriculum resources is about teaching these histories which often do not get the attention they deserve.
The deeply personal attacks on many of us by politicians and other public figures are irresponsible and dangerous. For example, one MP presented commissioners as members of the KKK. Robust debate we welcome. But to depict us as racism deniers, slavery apologists or worse is unacceptable.
This is a wide ranging report, and we hope it will lead to further research and better understanding of the complex causes of inequalities in the UK. Our terms of reference were ambitious and, despite the disruption of COVID-19, we addressed them by drawing upon a wide range of sources and evidence, as well as the lived experience of people, including our own.
We hope that going forward, the report will be read carefully and considered in the round. Our experience since publication only reinforces the need for informed debate on race based on mutual respect. The 24 recommendations we have made will, in our view, greatly improve the lives of millions of people for the better if they are all implemented.
They can get tae fuck. No sympathy at all.
2 Likes
The problem is not so much the report, its that the commissioners were selected with an outcome in mind.
Sewell and Munira Mirza have a long history of denying institutional racism. So it’s no surprise they generate a report denying institutional racism.
Its like getting Nigel Farage to write a report on the EU. There is only one outcome.
6 Likes
I don’t know these people but I 100% suspect you’re right. That’s exactly the perception I get from it.
2 Likes
Just a few examples
https://twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/1272639442688380929?s=20
3 Likes
When I put vids on here from certain right wing commentators I get grief. You do know that Spiked used to be called everyday marxism?
Are you suggesting the quotes are incorrect?
Nope. But then is every right wing commentator wrong? ad hominem
Depends if that commentator is spinning and angle which is often the case no matter what side of the political circle you’re on.
Quotations are a little more difficult to spin. They can be taken out of context but that would then appear to be a very common occurrence for Munira Mirza which kind of suggests maybe they haven’t been.
There’s definitely a problem having people undertake an enquiry who already have a predetermined view about the outcome it will reach but find me someone engaged with these issues who doesn’t already have a view on it.
If the majority of those appointed to the commission were already of the view that institutional racism did widely exist within the UK, wouldn’t that similarly be a problem?
Why can’t these individuals have formed either of these views entirely independently and legitimately?
1 Like
I think if you need to commission a report into something there is probably something to the issue.
2 Likes
Agreed, but that’s not the same as questioning the objectivity of individuals.
In the words of Yes Minister, never commission an inquiry unless you know in advance what the outcomes are.
4 Likes
Equally as serious I would argue, along with questioning how thorough their investigation has been.
I feel it’s right to question the balance of the committee or whatever you want to call them.
From what I’m hearing there are doubts about that.