AIBU to agree with Diane Abbott

It’s the visibly part.

You are visibly of a race/religion that is often discriminated against.
Just like black, Asians etc.

Some Muslims are visibly of colour or quite apparently of that religion. Whereas others appear white and so are not as readily subjected to racism.
Likewise Jewish people I know - some look Mediterranean, whereas others are easily identifiable as Jewish and have suffered more antisemitism than the former.

All types of racism/prejudice are abhorrent but it is quite easy to understand why some may be more readily targeted than others.
It’s undeniable.

My husband and I are visibly Jewish. We’ve received abuse for it on several occasions. He is also non-white and gets abuse for that too. Neither is worse or more/less serious.

A classic race to the bottom thread.

There isn't a hirachy or better/ worse racism. It's a horrific experience for everyone who a subjected to it.

She said this years' ago. Straight out of the Whoopi Goldberg school of ignorance. Then again, this is the woman, who reckoned only black women would do anything for their kids.

What she said previously was that they don't experience racism but prejudice which seems to be a clear attempt to create some sort of hierarchy.

There is appalling racism experienced by Jews or Gypsies /Roma and others. And that racism seems to be accepted ( or even applauded by some in the case of Jews since October 7th especially. The recorded incidents of racial hatred against Jew is widely disproportionate to their very small numbers in the UK) in a way that overt racism against PoC is not, amongst the middle classes at least.

Sure, they may have different experiences from black people, (though remember some Jews are very identifiable as are many gypsy/ roma people) but that doesn't mean the racism they experience is less in frequency or impact.

I think Diane Abbot is someone who has done a lot of good work but should probably stay well away from tv interviews and the media in general.

She probably has a point but then she's also been pretty racist in her attitudes regarding white people, so I don't bother listening to anything she has to say these days

How would Diane Abbott know what it’s like? She hasn’t had the experience some Jewish people will have had.

We get a lot of Orthodox Jews travelling here. Even if they're not wearing traditional clothing it's usually pretty obvious who they are.

Similar for Irish Travellers.

She absolutely did bring it up! She wrote a letter to the Observer.

It's back in the news after a recent interview asked her if she regretted what she said in that letter but she chose to double down on it.

She's right at the base level that racism based on skin colour is different to racism based on religion/nationality.

I'm suspicious about what her motivation was in pointing this out/making an ongoing issue of it in this way. It does seem like she is trying to create a racism hierarchy, although she hasn't specifically said this. It's hard to imagine why else she's choosing this hill to die on.

Diane Abbott didn't bring it up. She was asked about it in an interview. I have a lot of time for Diane Abbott and I think the media spend a lot of time trying to discredit her. Probably can't stand to see a black woman in a position of power.

I think there's almost a certain level of socially 'accepted' racism when it comes to travellers which is horrible. And a lot of victim blaming.

No she’s not right. Look at the persecution of Jewish people over time.

But she didn't just say it was different. She basically said that non BAME people could experience prejudice but that it was not racism. She included travellers, Jews, Irish people and even redheads in her comparison.

She absolutely was saying that one was worse than the other.

She wrote: “It is true that many types of white people with points of difference, such as redheads, can experience this prejudice.

“But they are not all their lives subject to racism. In pre-civil rights America, Irish people, Jewish people and Travellers were not required to sit at the back of the bus.
“In apartheid South Africa, these groups were allowed to vote. And at the height of slavery, there were no white-seeming people manacled on the slave ships.”

That she is diminishing anti semitism (and therefore the holocaust) by comparing it to prejudice against people with red hair is beyond belief.

Racism comes in lots of forms. But her whole tone was that the suffering of people from BAME backgrounds is worse. And that is a flawed argument

I don't think it's about creating a hierarchy of racism as such - all forms are insidious and deeply harmful. However I do think there are certain privileges afforded to people who's heritage/religion/ethnicity is not very obviously visible that others do not experience. Being black is one example of this, wearing certain religious dress (for example what Jewish or Muslim people may wear) is another. There is a certain element of choice attached to religious clothing that obviously doesn't exist with skin colour but again that is very nuanced and many people may not see it as a 'choice' for lots of valid reasons. But ultimately someone could decide to leave the Orthodox Jewish community or decide to stop wearing Hijab and noone would know they ever wore religious/cultural dress in the first place, a black person won't ever be able to decide to stop being black.

One of my friends growing up was Jewish and I didn't know until she told me, not that it made any difference to me. But she had the privilege of being able to provide that personal information in the way she saw fit, when she saw fit and to who she saw fit. Others don't get choice in that and don't have the option to stay quiet about a part of their identity should they find themselves in a social dynamic where they feel unsafe or uncomfortable because of others behaviour.

I don't think it's about undermining the experience of one person to be able to recognise that another will experience racism in a different way. And I certainly wouldn't describe it as specifically anti-semitic given that Jewish people, as with any other collective are a diverse social group so there will be diversity within their experiences as well. I do think it's about having a sense of understanding of the difficulties some people may face and how it affects them specifically. And to me that is important in addressing racism in all its forms and appropriately supporting people.

It doesn't make the racism or xenophobia any less harmful and unacceptable, but it's acknowledging that certain people will have a different experience of it and for some people there is more inherent risk attached because their heritage or religion is immediately identifiable by harmful people which could unfortunately make them a target.

Some can 'hide' their ethnicity/identity, and some can't.

It's irrelevant anyway. A person can hide their sexuality - does that mean homophobia is less bad than other discrimination? It's just a weird stance to take.

She’s entirely correct unless she’s said that one is worse than the other.

Of course it’s different if you can “pass”. I’m not sure it’s better just different. It’s a bit like being obviously visibly disabled and having an invisible disability. Your experience is shaped by how easily you are identified.

As a Londoner, I notice people are more racist to Travellers than to those of African/Caribbean/ Asian heritage.
The travellers get a really tough time there is a lot of prejudice. I think it is because here we are a very mixed community already, less than 40% white. Everyone mostly accepts one another but not the travellers. People are suspicious and scared of them in a way I don’t usually see around here (London).

She’s entirely correct

And for people saying they can't stand her. At one point half of all abuse towards MPs on twitter was directed towards her. Is she really so unlikable that she deserves that? No, that's racism (and probably a bit of sexism thrown in) It became a bit of a thing to have a go a her when she fluffed those figures. While other MPs who said much stupider things didn't get nearly so much abuse.

Yes and no.

At the most basic level she's obviously right: you can't hide being black or "pass" in that highly unpleasant phrase. It's inescapable and its much more blatant when it involves people who are visibly of a different ethnicity.

I also agree with the poster who said there shouldn't be a hierarchy of racism and endless sub-categories created with different levels of compassion attached. We shouldn't forget many people have historically used the argument that Jewish people are "white" (even though many are not) and therefore they don't experience discrimination in society in the way people of colour do. Which is simplistic, insidious and misleading. Although I respect Diane Abbott a lot and think she's been endlessly bullied throughout her time as an MP, she does spend more time revisiting this topic than is sensible for her and doesn't help herself here.

Equating Jewish people in England with Gaza immediately. And now you’ll say you’re not an anti semite

But it’s at best idiotic, at worse malign. Yes, you can instantly see skin colour in a way you can’t always see other things - but (a), in her constituency alone there are lots of orthodox Jewish people who, through their dress, are equally as instantly recognisable by their Judaism as anyone would be by their skin colour, (b) it suggests that people have the privilege of hiding their Judaism in a way black people can’t, which is crass (to say the least) given the history of Jewish persecution and the complete inability to hide from that persecution (not to mention that nobody should have to hide their ethnicity or see doing so as a privilege), (c) she compared Jewish people and Irish travellers to people with red hair, which is trivialising and comparing groups who have suffered genocide (Jews) and hugely low social and economic discrimination and disadvantage (travellers) with people who suffer social bullying, and (d) she did this in the context of the Labour Party being blind to antisemitism in its own ranks, including by the leadership at the time of which she was a senior part. And lastly, she said today that she didn’t understand why anyone would object to what she said, which given the discussion about it at the time must mean she hasn’t listened to anything anyone said. She doesn’t have to agree with the point of view, but to not even be able to state what it is must mean she’s either unwilling or unable to listen.

So no, I don’t think she’s right, and my sympathy is about level with the floor.