Diane Abbott suspended again …

[ANagsHead]

https://news.sky.com/story/politics-latest-starmer-small-boat-crossings-macron-state-visit-the-king-12593360?postid=9893694#liveblog-body

I listened to the interview this morning; it was - measured. (Though I held my breath.)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m002fwpv

I agree it’s hard to see the benefit of saying it - when there’s no clear policy aim.

I think the numbers aspect is often ignored. I live in a city with a very large visible Muslim population. Some individuals and businesses display Palestinian flags. They also have vocalsupport from some groups who are not Muslim but see themselves as anti-racist. The Jewish community is very small. Making ourselves visible by wearing a Magen David or a kippah or a yellow ribbon 🎗 badge does have risks.

And if you are ultra Orthodox your clothing makes you immediately identifiable.

Diane's position is quite simplistic. As an experienced politicians, she knew her remark was something of a challenge at a time when UK politics and society are being influenced by reactions to events in the Middle East.

Do irish people experience racism now?
I am aware of historic discrimination but I haven’t heard of this happening in more recent times.
Genuine question.

I don’t think she mentioned Irish people although others on this thread have. She referenced Jewish and Roma (traveller) people as experiencing racism differently.

In answer to your question, I’m not sure. I doubt it’s anywhere near as bad as it used to be - “No dogs, no Irish” displayed in pubs.

Exactly. Then it's just divisive, and worse, makes it appear that she is not so concerned about the increase in antisemitism, for example.
I can't really see the point in her repeating these things.

Abbott's letter in full 'Tomiwa Owolade claims that Irish, Jewish and Traveller people all suffer from “racism” (link to article in Comment). They undoubtedly experience prejudice. This is similar to racism and the two words are often used as if they are interchangeable.

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.'

She mentioned Irish people. She did not specify Roma, she said Tavellers which is an umbrella for Roma, Irish Travellers and others.
Yes Irish people still experience prejudice.

@SharonEllis Ah, ok, thanks for clarifying re: her mentioning Irish. I hadn't realised.

No problem.

Like her or loathe her she has always been very clear about her views and principles, everyone knows what she stands for and she is not afraid to speak out.

That's a rare occurrence in politicians today.

Does anyone know what Starmer stands for? he seems to have no Labour values whatsoever or leadership qualities (if he is so rattled by different opinions).

He also removed the whip from Labour MPs for supporting disabled people. How did Labour leadership come to that?

I don't think Abbott at this stage in her career gives a damn about what the Labour leadership says or does. I assume she will join whatever party Corbyn and Sultana create.

Does all that make it ok to minimise racism suffered by others? Has she actually been clear? She initially said that letter was sent in error. Now she's saying she has no regrets. Seems muddled to me.

She knew what she was doing. Baiting the leadership as part of undermining Starmer. What is that phrase, piss on the pot or get off?

I hope the current Labour leadership doesn’t move heaven and earth to prevent her ascension to the House of Lords …

Obviously people with more colour to their skin stand out more, but so do people with ginger hair, people wearing glasses, people with tattoos and people wearing cultural clothes. One only has to walk around Golders Green to realise those jewish people likely experience prejudice every day too.

You know who also experiences prejudice every day? disabled people - should we pretend that prejudice against the disabled is less important? What about fat people? Prejudices are prejudices - we need to stand against them all equally.

Obviously some people experience more prejudice than other people for a variety of factors, not least where they live or how wealthy or famous they are; this is no reason for Abbott’s divisory comments.

Abbott’s problem is she is trying to segregate racism into different levels - thereby diminishing some tyoes of racism and elevating other types (in Starmers eyes this is anti-semitic but in my eyes it’s simply prejudice itself).

Abbott is all about dividing people not uniting them. She should be trying to combat racism not diminish prejudice of a group she doesn’t belong to. She should be kicked out of the labour party.

''@SharonEllis · Today 10:11
Does all that make it ok to minimise racism suffered by others? ''

Where/when did Abbott do that?

She tried to make a distinction between prejudices that some white people can face because of their religion or an aspect of their appearance and the systematic racism faced by black people.

I am British, white but I have a foreign accent. I have faced some negative comments and prejudices in my life in the UK.

But this is NOTHING compared to what my Black friends tell me of their experience. Theirs is a constant issue based on the colour of their skin.

It would be arrogant for me to think that my experience of prejudice is in any way the same as theirs...

There is no place for prejudices or racism in society at all.

But I don't blame Abbott, a woman who has faced horrible comments in her life as an MP simply for being a Black woman, for wanting to highlight what it means to be black in the UK.

She did!!!

From what you say I agree it would arrogant of you. But that wasnt tbe comparison she was making. This is the full text of her letter.
'Tomiwa Owolade claims that Irish, Jewish and Traveller people all suffer from “racism” (link to article in Comment). They undoubtedly experience prejudice. This is similar to racism and the two words are often used as if they are interchangeable.
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.'

Dianne Abbott herself is a case study of the constant assault on blackness. That woman has suffered more racism and degradation than most, and it's remarkable that she is still going. Hopefully on her way to the Lords if KS doesn't get his way.

That does not take away from the racism faced by any other groups and it sure as hell is not antisemitic.

Keir reminds me every day why I couldn't, in good conscience, give him my vote.

Yes 👍🏻

Seriously???? Equating 'people with more colour to their skin' 🙄 is deeply offensive and is on no way comparable to people who have ginger hair, wear glasses or choose tattoos or to wear cultural clothing.
Her name is Diane her surname is Abbott.

Fair point.

I think it's pretty obvious that people who are visibly "not white" - whether Black, Asian or some other visible minority such as orthodox Jewish - will experience racism very differently from those who can easily "pass" as white. It would be ridiculous to try to argue otherwise, and I guess that's what Diane is trying to draw attention to.

That doesn't mean that other groups don't experience racism, though, or that it is any less traumatic and damaging when they do. We know that some of the most horrific racist atrocities in history have been perpetrated against people who "look white" - the massacre of six million Jews by the Nazis is an obvious example of this, and its impact continues to reverberate across the generations. Antisemitism and prejudice against other "white" minority groups is real, pervasive and persistent, and the impact on individuals can be profoundly damaging.

Aknowledging the specific daily challenges of those who do not "look white" does not mean that we need to minimise or dismiss the importance or the impact of racism for other groups. "Different" does not have to mean "less".

So I do understand what Diane is getting at here, and I think she has a right - perhaps even a duty - to make her point. However, I am very surprised after the previous incident that she has chosen to express these views again without having taken a bit more time to qualify what she is saying and to make it very clear that she is not minimising or dismissing the very real impact of racism on those groups who are less visibly "different".

There should be room for a more nuanced conversation about this, while acknowledging that racism can be horribly damaging for different people in different ways.

I agree, its bloody refreshing to hear a politician speak clearly and honestly from their heart - whether you agree with their standpoint or not. Starmer blows with the wind, and he couldn't answer a question directly if his life depended on it!

Im Catholic from an Irish background, yes as a child /teen growing up in the IRA bombing era I experienced a lot of prejudice, worse for my parents. But you can't compare that to the racism that black people experience.

Exactly. She said she sent the letter in error and apologised, then repeated the same thing again! Did she not mean anything she said originally? She has a point when she talks about visible and invisible minorities but to compare groups of people who were mass murdered and have been persecuted throughout history ( Jews and gypsies) to people with red hair was offensive. She said she recognised that but she clearly didn't. She's her own worst enemy.

She wasn't clear and honest, she denied she meant it, now says she did. If ignoring the Holocaust is in her heart I don't want to know!

Didn’t she say the draft of the letter was sent in error? That’s not quite the same as retracting a thought.

FWIW I don’t believe she ever intended to minimise anyone else’s suffering, but simply to highlight or acknowledge a difference. It obviously wasn’t helpful without more.