AIBU to agree with Diane Abbott

[Elephantiner]

I cannot stand Diane Abbott, she has a lazy, patronising manner which riles me, but she has said that people visiblybof a different race (e.g. black people) experience a different sort of racism than those who’s race is not visually obvious (travellers, Jewish people etc). She has a point, doesn’t she? Am I missing something here?

Obviously all types of racism are utterly abhorrent.

It is so sad that there are so many posters on mumsnet who agree with Dianne Abbott, that they also minimise the racism aimed at jewish people, travellers and others by calling it 'prejudice' and comparing it to what red head might face instead. It isn't just on this thread but many others on mumsnet.
Dianne Abbott also apparently lied by apologising the first time when she obviously thinks what she wrote was correct.

I find her staggering in her arrogance. As has been seen on the thread, she's meant to garner respect because of her achievements as a woman of colour. Why? All that does is keep the divide going. One should be recognised, despite their ethnicity, not because of it. Discrimination and oppression thrives on that division. Ignorance/prejudice makes a living from it.

This thread and conversation are quite sad. Having read the full thread and followed the story, my opinion is that the growing problem in our society and globally is communalism.

The term racism is extremely loaded and means different things to different people based on their experiences and understanding of history. This can make it difficult for people to have civil conversations because it is hard for many to empathise with others if they feel their own pain and suffering are being minimised.

We know scientifically that the concept of race is a social construct with terrifying implications for the victims within the designated groups singled out for designation as inferior. A lot of it stems from imperial history with its consequences for how society was shaped and the beliefs that have been baked into our culture. It must be very frustrating when you are trying to correct historical wrongs to have your cause conflated into other historical wrongs that stops you from making any progress in gaining redress for the injustice you are trying to draw attention to.

In recent times our society has seen an increase in communalism which is harmful for social cohesion and mutual understanding. In some cases the retreat into communalism is conducted by racists, and in other cases as a defence against racism. I think it is something that we need to pay attention to and guide against engaging in, as well as try to understand why it is happening.

@5MT2 I agree with one highlighting social injustice, when it impacts on them. What I disagree with is stirring the pot. There are some bad faith actors, as well as good ones in the fight for equality.

Its a good idea to read posts from Jewish pp so you can understand their experiences.

The idea that a Black person won’t stand out in a diverse area like London deeply misunderstands how racism and visibility operate. It assumes racism is only about numerical minority status, when in reality it’s also about power, stereotypes, and how people are socially positioned.

Black people can and do face racism in areas where they are not a small minority whether that’s through over-policing, unequal access to opportunities, everyday microaggressions, or being treated as inherently suspect. Simply being surrounded by other Black people doesn’t erase centuries of structural racism or how that shapes people’s perceptions and experiences.

And visibility doesn’t just mean “standing out visually in a crowd. It also means being racialised having your identity constantly marked and politicised in ways that white people aren’t. That happens regardless of how diverse a postcode is.
So no, Oshio’s argument isn’t “just addressing Diane’s point.” It’s relying on a superficial reading of visibility and using diversity to downplay the realities of anti-Black racism.

Abbott has downplayed racism, period. In her efforts to present prejudice as being tiered, she's diluted the whole concept.

Oh please. I know about structural racism. I never referred to standing out in in the whole of London. You seem to have consumed a lot of abstract theory but perhaps are less sensitive to reality and complexity. There are loads of contexts in which a black person doesn't 'stand out'. This conversation does reveal some of the limits of Abbott's theory of racism based purely on 'visibility'.

As a Mixed Race woman, I think people need to redefine what they think racism is.

Growing up I had people say racist statements to me, racist insults, I have only had this in recent years by other people of colour. In fact, I have heard more racist insults directed at White people by people of colour, than I have anything else. So where does this all fit in? It doesn't under the current perception of what racism is. There is nothing systemically racist in Britain towards people of colour, there are racist attitudes that persist but increasingly directed by a diverse demographic of people at a diverse demographic of people. More worrying is how discriminatory policies, such as Police services openly saying they will discriminate against White people in recruitment, are becoming common and people who claim to be against racism are supporting them. In 2025, we should be talking about all discrimination and stop representation of just what will keep us in a job which to be honest, is all Diane has done and she has done this for a long time. She used to stand for Black people to bring them up, then around 20 years ago she seemed to switch to stand to bring White people down. This is just another example. She should be standing for all people and stop with the “yes but…” arguments.

Racism in its meaning is so convoluted now when compared with real world. Nobody mentions the fact that grooming gangs were protected by police, social services and even politicians because they were one demographic and the victims were predominately White…Can you imagine if this was reversed?

No, I think people need to have a long hard look at themselves if they honestly think racism is exclusively White on Black and that Black people get the worst of it, its a too general statement. This WAS the case when I was growing up in the 70s and 80s, it absolutely is not now and its disturbing that this narrative is still being pushed while extremely disturbing racially motivated injustices are being ignored or even supported…To the point that I would say its almost systemic in itself.

Diane Abbott is simply doing what she has done for a long time, keep her career going that little bit longer by keeping her constituents happy with what she is saying. Sad as I was a huge fan of hers at one stage.

Thank you, I am sure there is a lot of truth in what you say. The voices of mixed race people have been brushed under the carpet for years. They automatically disrupt the binary that is set up by people who think prejudice is just about visible difference and and people who literally see the world in black/oppressed and white/oppressor can't cope with that.

👏 👏 the same applies to the fight against homophobia and transphobia. In decades gone by, the phobia WAS rife. Now we are in a more settled era with dealing with inequality, some people just want to keep the fires burning.

Saying “Black people don’t get stared at in Hackney” misses the point entirely and frankly, it’s disingenuous. It suggests a very surface-level understanding of how racism operates. Racism isn’t just about whether someone is a “rare sight” in a given area; it’s about power, history, systemic bias, and the way people are treated based on how they're racialised not just how often they’re seen.

As much as you want to critique Diane Abbott and those who agree her, you're replicating exactly the dynamic you're accusing her of minimising and dismissing another group’s experience of racism. Diversity in a place like Hackney doesn’t mean the end of anti-Blackness. Black people can still be stared at, profiled, excluded, and treated as “other,” Visibility isn’t just about novelty or numbers. You can be surrounded by people who look like you and still be targeted by a system that treats your racial identity as dangerous, undesirable, or inferior. Diversity in an area doesn’t insulate people from racism. If anything, it often exists alongside it.

I think what you’re doing here is veering into what’s often called the oppression Olympics trying to quantify and rank whose suffering “counts” more. Are you really suggesting that Jewish people face more racism than Black or brown people, as though these experiences are mutually exclusive or in competition?
That framing is both unhelpful and deeply problematic. Racism isn’t a zero-sum game. Antisemitism is real and horrific, and so is anti-Black and anti-brown racism. They operate differently, are rooted in different histories, and show up in different ways but they are all valid and dangerous.

It was about how visibility and structure play roles in how racism functions. A Black person’s racial identity is visible everywhere, at all times. That makes them uniquely and constantly vulnerable in a world where anti-Blackness is foundational and global in its reach. That doesn’t erase or minimise antisemitism, but it does highlight a different form of risk and exposure.

With your very theoretical lens and focus on an absolute hierarchy of race you are just missing the reality of people's experience. Somehow, at the end of the day people seem to find and be racist towards people who are not black. Abbott is minimising that experience.

I think part of what you're pointing to is how Jewish people don’t neatly fit into the dominant racial frameworks in countries like the UK and the US, where racism is often primarily understood through the lens of skin colour. Because many Jewish people particularly Ashkenazi Jews can appear white or "white-adjacent," their experiences of racism are framed cultural or religious prejudice, rather than recognised as forms of racialised oppression.

Historically, in many societies especially across Eastern Europe, Jews were perceived as fundamentally incompatible with the dominant cultural and national order. They were often viewed as socially, economically, and politically alien. Antisemitic portrayals cast Jews as economically suspect, politically disloyal, and racially inferior. These tropes persist in modern conspiracy theories that depict Jews as “global manipulators” or as secret controllers of media, finance, or government individuals who seemingly “blend in,” yet are never truly part of white society.

This is the core of the antisemitic paradox: Jews are seen as both insiders and outsiders, simultaneously invisible and hyper-visible. Jewish schools, ambulances, or charities are sometimes seen as supposed evidence of separateness or secrecy. The concept of Jews as the "chosen people" is often misunderstood by those outside the Jewish community and has sometimes used to portray Jews as claiming superiority over others.

Hmmmm...to all of this.

I've seen this too many times. Posters starting out with seemingly good intentions.

Yes, and?

Diana Abbott is an idiot. An idiot with a Cambridge degree but still an idiot. She's is a unique position to use her long and pioneering experience for the good, to really be a figure of respect and authority as Mother of the House and the first black woman MP but instead she chooses to behave like an attention seeking student.

I lived in her constituency for many years. She frequently used to come in to our family business, a shop, and chat with my mum. She might not have been able to visually recognise my mum was Jewish but she's utterly disingenuous to say you can't tell on sight because the name above the shop was immediately identifiable as Jewish.

Later on I spoke to her face to face on her decision to send her son to private school and she was incredibly dismissive and condescending to me. In fact, she told me I couldn't understand her position because I had daughters and educational provision in Hackney for girls was apparently excellent whereas for boys it was poor.

Diane Abbott has chosen division over unity, she's chosen to throw away her unique experience which could have been so valuable in favour of annoying the leadership once again. It's so disappointing to see a woman behave like that. And it's now so hard to be a left wing Jew, knowing that the left despises and rejects you for your ethnicity.

And she says......

@ForWittyTealOP excellent post. I believe every word of that.

Sorry don't' understand. Your post was merely proving how untenable Abbott's position is so I wasn't sure what your point was.

That"s right. She could have used her position to help heal but chose not to. To double down now on this idiotic letter was either very stupid or deliberately inflammatory. Labour has been a terrible place for Jews for years.

You are missing half a conversation here.

A poster wrote that they'd seen how Black and Asian people were stared at when they went in a public space.

Based on this they agreed with Abott. Ie: they were making the point POC "stood out" and this experienced worse bigotry.

So this is them, not me, drawing a relationship between "standing out in the crowd" and experiencing racism.

I merely replied that they do not stand out in Hackey.

Which they dont.

So you are ignoring the statement I was replying to, and falsely characterising my point, despite me having now clarified this twice for you.

Not sure where the poster is from, but I assume somewhere without very many Black and Asian people.

You seem to spend a great length of time creating word salads of theories and falsely accusing victims parents of things they didn't say - maybe your time being an expert on racism could be served better by listening to victim stories instead of gaslighting them?

I think it fine not to understand my point - we can all agree to disagree. I think discourse shows and demonstrates why they will never be unity or alliances.

I feel the same. Times change. Ultimately anyone being discriminated against, harassed, attacked or frightened based on their identity is an equal victim to anyone else, and targets change over time.

I recall being younger and seeing with my own eyes, frequest socially acceptable bullying and harassment of people of colour. As I've gotten older, that's reduced as thankfully we have worked hard as a society to reduce it.

Right now, Jews are the predominant target and rather than offering them the sake support, Abott is instead completely minimising reality which is so absolutely disappointing.

What I've just watched on twitter is a video of a jew being physically and verbally attacked by a mob of violent racists on the lawns of harvard university. The poor boy is just trying to go to class and they're swarming and blocking him and saying horrendous things.

Guess what? Every person in the crowd attacking him in themselves Black or Asian. So the binary Abott works within not only dismisses and minimises victims experiences but it seeks to imply that only people with darker skin can be victims, ignoring the very real truth that they are commonly perpetrators too!

We need, as you say, to completely rethink the binary from which we view this. Put simply I do not give a monkeys what colour skin someone has - whether they are victim or perpetrator is entirely dependent on their behavior.