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.

What have you actually called out?

It's the flowery language with little substance that is typical of ChatGPT. Are you saying you wrote it yourself? Again, oh dear. Are you a bot?

No one has said they have a monopoly on recognising racism, except DA and her bizarre supporters.

Thank you. In fact I'd go further and say it's virtually unreadable.

No she did not imply that at all. That’s you putting your narrative into her mouth.

Diane Abbott has had a lifetime of racism. She owes a grand total of zero to zero people with regards to her anti racism credentials- least of all a pair of randomers on MumsNet. I at least can recognise that.

I hear that it upsets you that Diane Abbott sees differences between the racism she experiences daily, and the awfulness that is antisemitism.
You want her to deprioritize her own lived experience to accept the orthodoxy you insist she must have to avoid your smearing her. It’s a form of Do what I tell you … or else. Can you see why it might look a bit same old same old to her. Perhaps you could reflect and ask yourself why it is about (a black woman voicing her own opinion different to yours) her that makes you feel so so upset.

And BTW, I’ve read enough Hannah Arendt to know that for all her mighty intellect, and insight into how humans commit atrocities, she didn’t like black people much.

Anyway, if you want to get one snide little comment in, please go ahead. I am leaving the thread now and won’t be returning.

Not sure who this is to but no I don’t think Diane Abbott can know what experience a Jewish person has.

"It increasingly feels like discussions of racism are only deemed legitimate when they centre on antisemitism, while other forms especially anti-black racism is downplayed or silenced. It seems at the moment; Jewish Antisemitism is the only protected form of racism that can be discussed."

@Lavenderflower you really aren't making yourself sound great. If I were you, I'd re-read this particular bit and try to understand just how troubling what you're saying is. I assume you don't consider yourself antisemitic, but surely you can see how similar what you're saying is to what anti-Semites say? "Jews think only they matter" "Jews control the media" "Jews control the narrative". So maybe reflect on that.

Creating a hierachy of suffering is one way to ensure that racism is a problem forever. Get us all arguing amongst ourselves over who has it worst and those who gain from inequity and mistrust can stand back and watch us scrap. Honestly I'd have hoped someone of Abbott's experience would be savvy enough to avoid that trap. But I'm pretty sure she has an agenda for bringing all this up again. Just haven't figured out what it is yet.

I can't second guess someone else but comparing sorts of racism and having a hierarchy, which Abbott seems to have, is racist. That's my objection to her.

I’m half Eastern European and half British. My maiden name gave this away, and I faced xenophobia in school as a result. This was during the 70s and 80s during the time of the Iron Curtain. My F was a refugee and was accused at times of being a Russian spy.

Since marrying I have an entirely British surname. It’s now entirely up to me whether I share my heritage with people I don’t know. A black person isn’t able to do that. So yes, I do benefit from white privilege.

I do see DA’s point, but she didn’t do herself any favours by lumping Jewish people and travellers with people with red hair. It trivialises the appalling prejudice that Jewish people and travellers have always faced.

I agree that no one can speak for the lived experience of another group, and that applies across the board including with Diane Abbott. However, it is important to contextualise her comments as reflecting the perspective of a visibly Black woman, speaking to how visibility influences the experience of racism.

While I may not agree with every aspect of her framing, I do believe that physical appearance plays a significant role in how individuals are perceived and treated in society. For instance, my own lived experience has shown how racial visibility operates in complex and deeply personal ways: my sibling and I, despite sharing the same background, present differently and are treated differently as a result. Even within my own family, across generations, there are stark contrasts in how racism is experienced. These differences among siblings, parents, children, and grandparents underscore the fact that racialisation is not solely about identity, but also about how identity is read and interpreted by others.

There is a clear and often overlooked distinction between visible and non-visible markers of identity. Just as those with visible disabilities may encounter different forms of public scrutiny compared to those with non-visible ones, so too does visible racial identity subject individuals to immediate and unavoidable forms of discrimination. Acknowledging this dynamic does not minimise experience marginalised groups. It recognises and distinguishes the different types of racism and prejudice.

Irrespective whether one agrees or disagree with Diane Abbot, she has raised an important issue that needs to be discuss and addressed. Unfortunately, the issue has been reduced to argument about whose suffering counts more. I think the more pressing issue is recognising how racism operates in varied and structured ways. People who are visibly racialised may face overt, unsolicited attention, hostility, or exclusion. In contrast, those who are not immediately identifiable may be exposed to casual or coded expressions of racism, often in spaces where their identity is presumed absent. Both are forms of racism; both are harmful

To suggest that the experiences of racism among Black people and Jewish people are interchangeable would be reductive. These experiences are shaped by distinct histories, social contexts, and structural dynamics. Similarly, Irish, South Asian, Traveller, and other racialised or marginalised groups encounter oppression in ways specific to their social positioning. It is important to note that some groups social positioning has changed over time. Nuanced conversations about racism require moving beyond binary comparisons and recognising the complexity and specificity of how different forms of oppression manifest.

I don’t think we should shut down discussion. If she was just saying that different groups experience different sorts of racism then she was right. This is obviously true. All racism is abhorrent but it is not all the same.
In real life I would not dare voice this opinion to anyone outside my immediate family - which is actually frightening. People are being silenced through fear.

She didn't just say that different groups experience different forms of racism. Her full views are quoted above. What she said is far worse.

Right. She said black people face racism and Jewish, Traveller and Irish (and by inference, brown ) people don't. No need for the cod academic language; either you believe in solidarity (and you've already said you don't) or you believe in a hierachy of suffering. Though given your anti semitism above, which I failed to recognise through the absolute word vomit of your post but which was picked up by someone clearly possessing more patience than me, I think we can discount your meanderings as being founded in racism.

I'd have more respect for her if she came out and questioned why women haven't made the prime political position, in the Labour Party. I suppose when you've earned a living off one inequality, it's not necessary to venture into another.

I had a quick Google and it seems to me that she did say racism takes many forms and is experienced by many different groups - in different ways.

Well she said Jewish and Irish people and Travellers don't suffer racism, they suffer prejudice akin to that felt by people with red hair. She said those groups didn't have to sit at the back of buses in the 50s, sidestepping the fact that by that time, quite a lot of Jews were, you know, dead, having been murdered in the preceding decade. I mean if you define racism as purely based on the colour of one's skin (and discount Asian people, non-white Jews/Irish people)then fair enough. But there again if you think the issue is as simplistic as that, there's not much reason anyone should listen to you. Try defining race/racism in the first place, it's a lifetime's study.

I think you're conflating several issues. I’m being very specific here. I am referencing is about the broader societal and institutional dynamics that determine which forms of racism are prioritised, and which are routinely sidelined or minimised. More precisely, I’m observing how the current Labour leadership is approaching these issues and what that reveals about the hierarchy of racialised experience in British public life.

As someone who is both Black and Jewish (among other ethnic backgrounds), I’ve experienced firsthand how conversations about racism can feel tiered. In my lived reality, anti-black racism is often dismissed, especially when it comes to historical trauma. There’s a repeated message that slavery was a long time ago and that Black people should “move on.

In contrast, the Holocaust has rightly been afforded public recognition, remembrance, and education and until recently, Jewish communities were often given more space to talk openly about their history. I believe part of this stems from the fact that the UK and the US position themselves as liberators during the Holocaust, whereas they were directly complicit in slavery and colonialism. That moral distance may help explain why certain histories receive greater validation than others.

To be absolutely clear: this isn’t about diminishing the Holocaust or antisemitism it’s about acknowledging the unequal treatment of racial trauma in public discourse. That disparity is alienating for many marginalised groups, especially when their own histories are brushed aside. That said, I also think the political and cultural tide is shifting. In light of current events in the Middle East, public sympathy toward Jewish communities is waning and now they are being framed as colonisers. I think antisemitism may grow in both subtle and overt forms as a result. I think history may repeat itself with Jews getting expelled.

At the same time, I find Keir Starmer’s treatment of Diane Abbott to be deeply troubling and hypocritical. His recent language on immigrants echoes rhetoric more commonly associated with Reform UK. Whether intentionally or not, the message being sent is that some forms of racism are politically safer to challenge than others. And right now, it feels as though discussion on antisemitism is the only form of racism that being protected. The comments on the thread, certainly reinforces this feeling.

I think she said that Jewish, Irish and Traveller people experience prejudice as do people with red hair. That’s not the same as saying they experience prejudice akin to people with red hair.
She pointed out that people of colour have experienced racism in a different way to other groups; she didn’t deny that other groups have also experienced suffering.

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."

Anyone with a commitment to a fair and equitable society needs to rebut Abbott's brand of divisiveness.

There is still time for you to reflect and learn. People do change, and you can.

Minds, like books, can only work if they are open.

If you don’t realise how goady this is you need more self-awareness.

Why is it every anti Semite claims to be Jewish? Usually boils down to "I ate a latke and I liked it".

Are they jealous of us?

This thread is a poor example of being allies, by all.

One poster singled out Dianne Abbot’s son for criticism, even though he is not part of the discourse.

And no one on this thread intervened to say it’s not in the spirit of the thread.

That’s the problem though. Having the piss taken out of you for being a ginge is not akin to racism.

Perhaps that’s because they don’t get off on trying to censor people.