Spectator article on Racial division

[BovaryX]

There is a great article in the Spectator on speaking out against the divisive rhetoric of allegedly 'progressive' movements. It describes the totalitarian impulse in which denunciations and baseless accusations are deployed to shut down criticism. And silence questions. This article is signed by Ike Ijeh, Ash Hirani, Helen Pluckrose, Andrew Doyle, Zuby and many others. At a time when freedom of speech, critical thinking and classical liberal values are under sustained attack, this is worth reading.
www.spectator.co.uk/article/racial-division-is-being-sown-in-the-name-of-anti-racism-it-s-time-to-speak-out/amp?__twitter_impression=true

Looks interesting, thanks BovaryX. I have wondered who benefits from convincing people that they are helpless victims, no point trying to improve your life, you’ll never succeed because the powerful people hate you etc.

One person who has benefited significantly is the white 'liberal' middle class author who has diagnosed an affliction which affects 100 percent of her white 'liberal' middle class target audience and which she can helpfully provide the cure for $10,000....

excellent. I hope it gains some momentum. I am deeply disturbed by the present day narrative that is guaranteed to cause more racial unrest.

I disagree with this article.
It is essentially 'all lives matter'
Which is the equivalent argument to 'men get raped too'

They don't think the UK in 2020 is racist. I think it is
I bet they don't think the UK In 2020 is sexist either

They don't like concepts of white privilege and structural racism. As a feminist I think these exist and are analogous to male privilege and patriarchy.

I really don't get why you would 'believe in' structural sexism ie patriarchy and not in structural racism.

It is essentially 'all lives matter

I think that is a lazy, derivative slogan which fails to address the criticism made in this article. I don't think collective guilt is a helpful paradigm. I think it is profoundly regressive. Freedom of speech is under sustained attack by those who expect people to chant slogans without question. No apologies for being a dissenter.

Wow, very interesting. I don't agree with all of it, but it's good to see different views.

"The common conflation of the issue of race in the US with the UK (in relation to criminal justice, for example) is unhelpful as it makes it difficult to discuss our specific historical circumstances and the contemporary challenges we face."

This point is one that has particularly baffled me. As an Asian woman (as in grew up in Asia), I'm really confused to see people in my home country posting prolifically about BLM when we have a really small number of black people living there, but many people from other racial minorities. I have never seen anyone protesting against the often terrible treatment these people receive. Likewise, no protests against the current situation in HK or the treatment of Uighurs in China, despite these countries being much closer to home.

Freedom of speech is under sustained attack by those who expect people to chant slogans without question. No apologies for being a dissenter.

Well said.

Cheers! TheRealMcKenna

Cloud interesting post. The inconsistencies in much of the SJ movement are one of its defining features.....

I agree with some of it and not with other parts. I laughed at “soulless acronyms”. We communicate so much more in written form nowadays (social media) and it can be very stark, something really cold about it.
On the other hand I do think there is structural racism. It’s often passive eg other people’s experiences are just not considered. This happens to women too and I think via our experience with institutional sexism we could as women empathise with the same happening to Black people.