David Lammy on LBC

eazybee

The Government has not denied that institutional racism exists. The Commission on Race and Ethnic disparities has produced a report, which includes the comment: "the term institutional racism is being used too liberally to describe different outcomes, at times without sufficient data."

So what will that mean in practice?

My MP happens to be the Equalities Minister and I've heard her talk many times about how she doesn't believe racism is a problem in the UK.

She happens to be black and female and extremely right-wing. She also comes from a wealthy, professional family and just doesn't recognise racism in the UK.

Smileless2012

Exactly eazybee an important post on a thread where some posters are so fixated on only factual information being presented.

So what kind of information do you prefer, if not factual?

Has April Fools Day come early?

Whatever the report says, the evidence is that there is discrimination in health, housing, employment, education and justice. Perhaps by inserting the word "deliberately" the report seeks to propose that any discrimination that occurs is not consciously intended. Even if that is the case, it still needs to be addressed.

In any case, don't the words ""the term institutional racism is being used too liberally to describe different outcomes, at times without sufficient data" suggest that there is discrimination but that term is too liberally applied?

I really don't know how non-white people put up with the sort of vile comments that the woman made to David Lammy - and then for it to be insinuated that everything is hunky dory so far as race relations in this country are concerned.

Exactly eazybee an important post on a thread where some posters are so fixated on only factual information being presented.

Boris Johnson set up the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities to examine inequality in the UK.

Their report says: "Put simply we no longer see a Britain where the system is deliberately rigged against ethnic minorities"

A rose by any other name....

The woman phoning in to David Lammy is clearly a bigoted racist but it's interesting to see how this thread has developed into a discussion about ethnicity, which I always thought is self ascribed. If Mrs Bigot doesn't think David Lammy can ever be English, well that's her problem. She's entitled to believe what she wants, vile though it may be, as long as she doesn't do anything that contravenes the law, she's in the clear. If anyone on here doesn't think there's an ethnic group, White English, they are also entitled to their view although I'm sure people who self ascribe to that ethnicity might disagree. There's lots of good reasons why we collect data on ethnicity, just like collecting data on gender (that's changing!) etc. Ethnicity may be a social construct or a real phenomena but it has a purpose. If we don't use ethnicity, what would you put in it's place?

The Government has not denied that institutional racism exists. The Commission on Race and Ethnic disparities has produced a report, which includes the comment: "the term institutional racism is being used too liberally to describe different outcomes, at times without sufficient data."

the polluting comment was awful

Galaxy

I wonder if there is much point in engaging with the likes of Jean, is there anything that would have changed her viewpoint, I doubt it it's so entrenched.

I think you're right, which is why David Lammy's handling of her was spot on. Rather than coming over as an "angry black man with a grudge", he appeared like the rational adult in the room.

I wonder if there is much point in engaging with the likes of Jean, is there anything that would have changed her viewpoint, I doubt it it's so entrenched.

Alegrias1

I can't say anything about the census from this year, but in Scotland we'll be doing the census next year. Question 23 is about ethnic group. Option E includes the description Black Scottish or Caribbean Scottish. So, you can be black, you can have ancestors from the Caribbean, and you can be Scottish.

You can be Scottish Chinese, Scottish Pakistani, Scottish Asian......

Freedom, come all ye .

Interesting that Jewish and Sikh are included as "ethnic" groups because they most certainly aren't.

Well those who produce the census were taken to court and lost for their failures around other categorisation so I wouldnt trust their judgement too much.

Quite honestly, I couldn't care less what the government thinks. Today, it has in any case denied that institutional racism exists in the UK, so presumably it doesn't matter what colour skin we have or what our cultural identity is.

I assume you've watched/listened to the video in my OP. The woman claimed that David Lammy can never be English. If ethnicity is about cultural identity, there is no reason why he can't be. If his ancestors had been white, there would have been no doubt.

Ethnicity is not a scientific term. It is a term from social sciences used by people with a nationalist narrative.

The woman on the LBC phone-in is racist and her claim that she is "Anglo Saxon" herself is rubbish. She can't be. Her comment about other people "polluting" the UK just proves that she's racist.

I can't say anything about the census from this year, but in Scotland we'll be doing the census next year. Question 23 is about ethnic group. Option E includes the description Black Scottish or Caribbean Scottish. So, you can be black, you can have ancestors from the Caribbean, and you can be Scottish.

You can be Scottish Chinese, Scottish Pakistani, Scottish Asian......

Freedom, come all ye .

growstuff

I can't remember what question the census asked. Whatever it was, there really is no such thing as "English" ethnicity. It's a concept left over from the nineteenth century's obsession with the superiority of certain groups and ultimately leading to ideologies such as Nazism. Nobody in the UK has pure English genes. No such person exists. It is also impossible to claim that one is of completely Anglo-Saxon descent. It's just not possible.

Well clearly the government feel differently about that as the 'white' ethnicity group had English in it.

All DNA testing can do is tell you that you share genes with people who tend to be grouped currently in certain geographical areas, who might very well have been on the move for centuries It cannot give a definitive answer to a person's ancestry, especially in women because mitochondrial DNA can only trace the maternal line. Y chromosome testing is more informative, but women don't have any Y chromosomes.

Smileless2012

Just because someone posts a different opinion that doesn't mean that opinion is based on false information because others don't agree with it.

But there's a difference between opinions and facts.

If I posted that I truly believe that unicorn dust falls out of the sky when there's an R in the month, It could be my firmly held opinion but it would be cobblers.

I can't remember what question the census asked. Whatever it was, there really is no such thing as "English" ethnicity. It's a concept left over from the nineteenth century's obsession with the superiority of certain groups and ultimately leading to ideologies such as Nazism. Nobody in the UK has pure English genes. No such person exists. It is also impossible to claim that one is of completely Anglo-Saxon descent. It's just not possible.

So; what did we all feel about the questions on the 2021 census in respect of ethnicity and nationality?

Just because someone posts a different opinion that doesn't mean that opinion is based on false information because others don't agree with it.

Criticising is not disagreeing, if libellous it can be reported

Smileless2012

Maybe some people don't like facts. I don't have an issue with facts, but I do have an issue with people being criticised for expressing an opinion because they haven't produced any facts and/or because their opinion is disagreed with.

So if someone posts an opinion based on false information, they shouldn’t be criticised for not bothering to check their facts even though what they posted might have been perceived as inflammatory, dangerous, misleading or libellous? Surely it depends on the seriousness of the issue being discussed? And that’s quite different from being disagreed with.

Anniebach

But if anyone disagrees are they - snowflakes ?

No, they're people who agree with "Jean" and would appear to think that people with dark skin are polluters.

PS. There is still no such thing as English ethnicity.

Eloethan Have you read about the latest report institutional racism in Britain by the UK Government’s Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities? Apparently, there is no such thing in the UK, so the word "ethnicity" becomes totally redundant even for the uses you describe.