" “White privilege” is sometimes described as “not having to think about your skin colour” as you navigate daily life. I understand this idea, but I’ve always argued that it depends where you are."
This is a really interesting point. I live in the countryside of the UK as an African and I was always aware of how I looked when I was out and about. And noticed I didn't think about my skin when I was around people who looked like "me". I couldn't articulate this feeling until I read somewhere that it was because of white supremacy since white people don't experience that. Which now as an adult I realise is completely stupid. I live in England, home of the English. And the dominant culture is theirs. The same way I don't think about my physical differences when surrounded by my ethnicity, they don't think about theirs surrounded by their ethnicity. The same is true for every country and the dominating ethnicity. The answer to why I felt this way was so simple, looking back at it, that it's borderline funny.
It's just part of being human, noticing obvious surface level (emphasis here) differences. To be completely candid, I used to get stuck on these differences and turned a collective of individuals into a caricature. Yet when I saw people who looked like me. African or Muslim etc. I saw them as human, nothing more attached to that. It wasn't until I heard about how people outside of this "group" saw us, that I was completely floored and reflected on the stereotypes I held about others.
I remember a "white" American joking with me that his son (who I'm friends with) should be careful because if he sees my hair, he'll have to marry me! I found it hilarious because I've never heard that before and didn't know people thought that. I had a similar reaction when an English man on a train told me to stop listening to the patriarch of my family, not knowing I was the eldest daughter of a bereaved widow. There was no patriarch. It's just funny to be in these (isolated and infrequent) situations because it takes me outside of myself.
Just a really good point you made, combatting that baseless claim and emphasising looking at the individual. Which is one of the best ways to dissipate any subconscious biases one has unknowingly placed on a "group". And when you do meet someone vastly physically, culturally different to you, see them as one person from x y z background. Not that background itself. And when I do meet someone that is racist, who is racialised as white, I try and combat my knee jerk reaction and imagine the roles reversed (I know, hated term). But imagining them as a racist from my ethnicity helps me see them more clearly. Weird, no real threat and more importantly a human who's behaving "badly". Not a bad person.
Hi fellow Brit. Thanks for your comment. I knew a Ugandan doctor some years ago in London and he had no inferiority complex about being black but being here and observing Afro-Caribbean culture, he really felt deep compassion for them and their problems. He could see that he had some advantages as someone whose ancestors hadn't been uprooted from their culture and enslaved. Do you have any thoughts you'd be willing to share on this? Best wishes
I agree with that Ugandan doctor. I am from Somalia and my people weren't enslaved either, so I will say that I don't have that pain of enslavement by another ethnicity as a West Indie person might. Although I think Afro- Caribbean people are still individuals who, if in the UK, still have opportunities. Of course, it's never that simple. People don't have to succeed if we're being realistic or could be impacted by personal or location problems.
Even though my country went through colonialism by 3 European powers (one of them being the Brits) and was impacted by the soviets in the past and currently American bombing, the modern problems we face is a culmination of outside, historical blame but also largely self-blame too. We need a better political system and better leaders and less internal corruption! Easier said than done.
And I will say, I'm very lucky to still have my Somali culture intact and that was never eradicated throughout our history. The most, I can think is some Italian words used in Somali. And of course, cultures are always changing but it was never largely (emphasis here) influenced by the Brits, Italians or French.
There are huge opportunities in the UK. I may face some backwards comments every so often but that doesn't even begin to impact my legal rights or the advantages I have here. Someone telling me to go back to my country doesn't magically locate me to my country. They're emotionally disturbing themselves and can drive themselves mad, but they can't physically remove me. They're human beings and humans behave badly. And I drive myself insane demanding that they shouldn't. I can't control that.
To be completely honest, they have a right to think that way. Who am I to control how other people think. As long as it's not physical I'm okay, and I've never had it be physical.
I think people are distracted honestly. Both racists and "woke" people alike. They're fighting air and more importantly they're fighting reality.
I think Africans don't tend to be self-hating and are sometimes prideful to a fault lol. I've never heard anyone in my family call themselves oppressed, there are some racial disparities here in the UK of course, but there are so many ways to propel ourselves out. And I'd go even further to argue that the racial disparities tend to be based on economic issues at the core. And that's the root of the problem that people tend to ignore because they're distracted.
This makes Africans very different from Europeans, North Americans, South Americans and Asians. How have Africans achieved this? What can the rest of the world learn from Africans to avoid self hatred?
"and are sometimes prideful to a fault lol."
Very good!
"I've never heard anyone in my family call themselves oppressed,"
Would it be accurate that most people who think they are oppressed live in Europe and North America? If so, why is this? Why do the woke want to colonize the minds of others with inferiority complex to damage self confidence, keep them down and manipulate them into thinking they are oppressed?
Why do so many Europeans and North Americans have so little self worth, self satisfaction and self confidence? Where does the inferiority complex come from?
"there are some racial disparities here in the UK of course, but there are so many ways to propel ourselves out. "
Are ethnic English taught this? Taught that they can be successful too? And do as well socio-economically as BAME? Do as well as immigrants? Do as well as ethnics?
"And I'd go even further to argue that the racial disparities tend to be based on economic issues at the core. And that's the root of the problem that people tend to ignore because they're distracted."
Would you say that the "disparities" or socio-economic outcomes are largely driven by broadly defined physical health, broadly defined mental health, broadly defined intelligence, and what the great economist Glenn Loury calls "relations before transactions" (or one's company and social relations and social circle)?
Do the English people understand that the world is moving at lightning speed and unless Britain keeps up, the UK can quickly fall technologically behind?
I don't think Africans are that thin skinned to be honest. We tend to be very blunt and very jokey people. It's hilarious whenever we're met with insults, it's not something we take to heart and to be honest, the older generation have seen and gone through so much crap, it's light comedy for them when the worst they get in the west is insults. I will say maybe that's changing for the younger generation who's influenced by their western upbringing and becoming more sensitive.
I remember once telling my mother I didn't like my nose and she laughed saying what can you do, LMAO. Best advice she could give me, I accepted it from that day on.
I always joke Somalis are so prideful that we see no other worthy opponent, so we turn on each other. Not a good thing though.
"Why do the woke want to colonize the minds of others with inferiority complex to damage self confidence, keep them down and manipulate them into thinking they are oppressed?"
No idea. I think they're influenced themselves and are found in a closed belief trap and naturally try to "enlighten" others. Maybe they're kids who start to notice disparities, imagined or not, and haven't thought about things hard enough or considered the bigger picture.
Or maybe they're people who identify with a mostly emotional explanation about the world. Or see their personal problems in a group context and thrive off that validation.
I don't think their motivations are insidious, I think they're trying to do good but fail at some aspects.
"Are ethnic English taught this?"
No idea lol. I guess so. But you know, people don't have to succeed or maybe they're content with less. It could be individual or maybe it's just location.
" Glenn Loury calls "relations before transactions""
Sounds interesting, I'm going to look into this.
"UK can quickly fall technologically behind?"
We're very aware of our economic problems in this country. The entire country is going through it now and it's one of our top priorities fortunately.
Do you reference African immigrants in England or African Britons versus Caribbean Britons?
If so, how would you describe the differences between Haitian vs Jamaican vs Dominican Republic vs Bahamas vs Guyana vs Trinidad & Tobago vs Igbo vs Somali vs Ghanaian vs Kenyan vs Tanzanian vs South African vs Nigerian Britons?
Thanks for an informative post. I got to know something of Somali culture when editing a book of the oral histories of 5 Somali origin women living in England. It was a real eye opener for me. I learnt so much. It's also given me some insight into the issues for Somali people in getting on in British life.
On a separate issue, one of the issues raised by the UN is that so much more attention and money is being devoted to Ukraine when there are so many other humanitarian catastrophes in the world - Pakistan, Afghanistan, Eritrea, whole horn of Africa. Can one tease out a racist element here? Or even if one can, is there any point and it's just a Q of those that see the need for a greater profile for those areas doing some more work?
IMO I think it's fair to shine a brighter spotlight on media, politics and international organisation on the issue of structural racism and how it produces worse outcomes for Asians and Africans in need compared to Ukrainians. I don't have a problem with CRT proponents contributing here. Of course, they don't have the complete answer - no one does. Thanks for reading my thoughts
That's really cool that you got to become familiar with Somali culture in that type of setting! :) Also, not all but most of our history is recited orally!
About the issue that the UN raised, I really do think that how you process that information is based on perspective! There is a tactful way to present a factual issue but there's only so much you can do, and people will interpret it depending on their belief system.
So, in that regard, I can understand why someone might see it as insensitive and or flirting with the line of racism. It will always rub some (emphasis here) people the wrong way when you say, to paraphrase very loosely, "hey I know this problem is really bad but don't forget about x y z".
But I didn't see it that way. I didn't see anyone advocating for stopping or cutting down donations to Ukraine but to focus on the issue of funding being spread too thin. Forget the current examples, but this has been an issue for a while when it comes to humanitarian causes, so it makes sense why people want to find a better way going forward.
Because it is natural that an issue with more media spotlight will receive more funding, and other countries will suffer because of that. It is a common problem. So, I don't think anyone should take it personally, the problem now just includes these current examples. The UN is there to maintain security and peace, so it is their role to focus on several nations not just one.
So, I'm in agreement with you there! I do think that there is an element of desensitisation to horrendous conditions in Asia and Africa compared to Europe. I think that's fair to say. I do have a lot of criticisms of CRT but when it comes to these more continental issues, some elements of CRT could be lifted to explain this phenomena.
"So, I'm in agreement with you there! I do think that there is an element of desensitisation to horrendous conditions in Asia and Africa compared to Europe."
When North West Europeans talk about this, is this a way to help overcome their deep fear and insecurity about the very rapid decline in the share of global wealth and income that they have. The rapid rise of the rest?
Ukraine is the poorest country in Europe has a comparable level of socio-economic development to Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Vietnam, Indonesia, Fiji, Iraq, India, Jordan, Jamaica, Lebanon, Philippines, El Salvador. Uzbekistan, Laos. Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, Mongolia.
Ukraine is a rentier country financed by international aid or international welfare. [As is Haiti, many African countries, Cuba, North Korea, West Bank, Gaza, Nicaragua, Nepal, Afghanistan and many other countries] Ukraine desperately needs help. [And I would argue a quick peace agreement with Russia on terms acceptable to Russia.]
Thanks. Yes, Somali culture and people are wonderful. The traditions from nomadic times are very interesting and totally outside my experience.
Just to add to your final comment - it's almost as if the only kind of CRT-related contribution to that debate that could help would be one from someone who is not a convinced believer in CRT. Most true believers in CRT, IMO, brook no compromise in the universal application of their beliefs and find it hard to take on board other viewpoints, so it's hard to give anything they say any credence, even when sometimes it does have some credence.
Agreed. When a lot of people say they disagree with CRT, it's met with a knee jerk reaction of people seeing us going the complete other direction, when truly we just want a better way to explain history and current problems. Less lazy, sweeping unprovable interpretations.
Which is why, I wish Dr Sheena Mason's theory of racelessness would gain more popularity. And her idea of how to teach histories especially ones concerning oppression of one ethnic group with the other. You should check her out if you haven't already!
Don't Asians in general do socio-economically well? Which is why there aren't many political refugees from asia aside from a small number of countries?
Ukraine is a lower middle income country socio-economically similar to Iraq, Jordan, Jamaica, El Salvadore, Philippines, Lebanon, Guatemala, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Ecuador, Bolivia, Uzbekistan, Laos, India.
Globally there is a not of anti Pakistani sentiment because of the Pakistani Army's support for terrorism and islamist extremism all over the world.
The Pakistani Army de facto invaded and destroyed Afghanistan in 2021, with a far bit of international support. Since the world backed Pakistan against Afghanistan, it is no surprise the world does not want Afghan refugees. Afghans have been abandoned, betrayed and turned upon.
There is also a lot of global anti Somali sentiment.
Why did you mention Eritrea? Because of the Tigray war (which ended in a military victory by Ethiopia and Eritrea)? Isn't Eritrea generally at peace?
The role of conservative sunni Pakistanis in grooming gangs in Greece, Denmark, Norway, Australia, Italy, France, Spain, Germany, UK has led to a global backlash. There is also a backlash against Pakistani migrants/immigrants in Saudi Arabia, UAE, Oman, Qatar, Bahrain, South Africa, Kuwait, Australia, Malaysia, China, Iran.
I've been in the UK since I was 2. I was in London up until age 13 and up until now, I've been living in west Yorkshire in the north of England.
I would define "British" as someone who lives and resides in the UK. I would define "English" differently depending on context. And one of my definitions is that the English are the native ethnics of England.
So yes, I'm British, a side of me culturally is British and that is influenced by the English (naturally since I live in England) in terms of how I communicate etc. So, whilst I'm not ethnically English, I am influenced by the English. So yes, culturally part of me is English.
If I were to reside in Scotland, I'd be British technically (even though due to history, some Scots wouldn't like to be grouped with the English as they see it as a forced homogeny) and influenced by the Scottish. Therefore, part of me will be Scottish culturally.
When I talk with Scottish or Irish people, I usually try and be more specific and say I'm English, to locate where in the UK I'm from.
Following my last point, what it means to be British greatly differs depending on where you are. That's why the definition is people who reside in the UK. I will say that British and English are conflated depending on context.
You will get different definitions of what it means to be British, from the Scots, Irish, Welsh, southern England, midlands, northern England. etc.
The English ethnicity, however, does influence Brits in England. And therefore, I am influenced by the English culturally. Ethnic English people do differ in some respects depending on location, so where in England you are, you will most likely be influenced by that English subculture. I've been influenced by London and also over the years by West Yorkshire. And I've been seen as the other place whenever I communicate with either resident.
Many parts of the UK do have their own subcultures. Absolutely! There are noticeable differences depending on where you live. Accents and slang words differ, as well as how open or more reserved people are. I've noticed that slang words in more ethnically diverse cities tend to be influenced by the West Indies, Africans and Arabs. Compared to their less diverse counterparts.
I think that English culture does mean different things depending on where you reside. Despite them all being ethnically English. So, some tend to identify more on their location. Example: "I'm from Liverpool", "I'm from Newcastle" etc. And I will say that even if they are English natives, some may be Anglo-Saxons or Anglo-Celtic. And are influenced by that too. (The Welsh) But I'm not too educated on that. And no one really identifies by that. Maybe people in Cornwell.
It's unfair to say a London English person is the same as a Yorkshire English person. There are similarities of course, the holidays they celebrate, the foods they eat but there are differences in how they communicate or how they were raised. This is evident by light-hearted jokes that northerners make about southerners.
Same goes for other ethnicities, residing in different areas of the UK. For example, a Kenyan raised in Liverpool might share a lot of similarities with a Kenyan raised in London but there will be differences in experience due to which English subculture they were influenced by.
And it's unfair to say someone from Northern Ireland is similar to someone from England (could cause issues lol), despite both technically being Brits.
I will go further and say that there are differences within cities, or within regions.
Based on my own observations, in bigger cities more ethnic minorities would say that they're British without any objections because there are more hyphenated British cultures there. I've always considered myself British. It's not until I moved into a rural area where there were more Ethnic English, where I felt maybe I don't have the right to say I'm British, even though I am. But I will say I was young and confused and now realise, I just didn't relate to that part of England since I was from the south. That's all. That doesn't make them more British and me less. Since there isn't one concrete definition.
Whether the greater London metropolitan area is culturally English greatly depends where in London they're from lol and what their ethnicity is. Some are less surrounded by a mix of ethnicities and maybe are influenced more by English culture (Essex). But everyone in London is British and London is in England, so therefore they are influenced by the English as well as the mix of cultures there.
I will say that I'm the same. A mix of cultures. Which makes sense. I'm not trying to be culturally English, a part of me is. And a part of me isn't because I'm not ethnically English. That's fine.
I hope this helps and hope you keep in mind that these are my personal thoughts and feelings. And that someone else may think differently.
How do you think Ethnic English will adjust as more and more of England is owned by foreigners and as more of the Ethnic elites, upper middle class and rich are immigrants or BAME?
My parents were Scottish but I grew up in London. My dad actually gave me an inferiority complex about being English rather than Scottish! So I was determined to be English and not Scottish. Of course, the differences are slight.
In my experience, one area which remains friendly, less changed by modern media culture, and where the people are at ease with each other is rural / small town Lancashire. Essex is also nice - lots of Cockney-origin extraverts there. I also like Brummies. Where are you from?
If I receive the full benefits of the law and have my civil rights respected how is that "privilege"? If people respect me in public and treat me fairly how is that "privilege"? If the police don't mistreat me how is that "privilege"?
Aren't all these things just the baseline standard of civilization? Aren't all these things simply the way liberal democracy should operate instead of an invisible form of apartheid? Shouldn't the issue be that certain people or groups are not receiving these benefits of civilization and how to rectify that?
This reminds me of a story I read about the Soviet Union:
"It’s 1917, and an old lady hears a commotion in the street.
“What is happening?” she asks her maid.
“Oh, it’s so exciting! They are protesting in the street!”
“What do they want?” the old lady asks.
“They want for there to be no more rich people!” says the maid excitedly.
The old lady sighs. “In my day they protested too, but back then they wanted for there to be no more poor people.”
This is always where Leftism ends up: pointing out some form of inequality or oppression, first trying to lift those on a lower level upwards, realizing how difficult that is, then quickly moving on to what really gets the blood flowing: attacking those who exist at the top of their imaginary pyramid of Oppression (whether that be the bourgeoisie, the kulak, and now White people), hoping to level them downwards as a way to bring about the egalitarian Promised Land.
In all its previous incarnations, Leftist rule or Leftist uprisings have only caused social destruction and a vast expansion of group hatred.
Excellent points. Being treated fairly is not "privilege." It's what we are all owed. The job is not to deprive some group of "privileged" status but to ensure that all share equally in the rights (and duties!) of citizenship.
This is similar to my own view - that the problem is not that some are treated the way we want all to be (ie: "privileged"), but that others are not. That is, the proper focus in on the under-privileged, those who are disadvantaged, whose condition we wish to change.
So for example, if it is found that group A receives the treatment we want and expect from police, but group B is not treated very well - the path forward is to seek effective remediation for the latter, not to make the former wrong in some way.
The "privilege" narrative is more about trying to use guilt to gain power, than about working together to find good resolutions for disadvantage.
Some would say that calling some group "privileged" is not a moral judgement, just a neutral description. I think that has an element of gaslighting tho - pretending it's nominally neutral while acting as if it's wrong and immoral. I've seen how in DEI training, everybody wants to escape being labeled as "privileged", and everybody is aware that that is a bad thing to be labeled, justifying worse treatment. The unprivileged are supposed to have the moral high ground in every interaction.
I'm not sure of your generalization of all historical leftist rule, but I can certainly see it happening around me.
I’ve had the same thoughts and experiences over the past 15 years or so regarding “white privilege” and “systemic racism”. What stood out to me was the focus on the United States being a racist country. This really bothers me because I see us as unique in all the world in our attempt to create a society made up of people of all ethnicities, nationalities, cultures, races from all over the world. We’ve only been at this as a nation for 246 years. That is an incredibly short amount of time compared to other nations across the globe. Our declaration that “all men are created equal” and have the right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” stands alone as a value to be nurtured and brought to fruition. We have not achieved all that we can. Yet. Dividing us into groups that are pitted against one another does nothing to help us achieve our ultimate goal.
Thanks for this comment! You're right to point out that nothing like the USA has ever been attempted before in human history. Saying that it's inherently racist is totally inadequate as an analysis. We have improvements yet to make but we also have the means to make them, so long as we are not, as you say, "pitted against one another."
All my years as an adult, I've been an active volunteer in my community. Not an activist, not an organizer - a volunteer. Coaching and tutoring at the Boys & Girls Club. Coaching at girls softball and Little League. Merit Badge Counselor and Cubmaster for the Boy Scouts. Coaching again at the Boys & Girls Club, even when my kids weren't playing. Volunteered alongside all kinds of folks from all walks of life: Lawyers, teachers, tradesmen, cops, firefighters, small business owners. White, black, brown, and every combination thereof. Republicans, Democrats, deline to states. You know who I didn't ever see out serving the youth of our community? Wokesters. Not a one. Too busy telling other people how to vote, I guess, to teach a kid how to field a grounder, solve a math problem, or tie a knot.
Effort and Commitment - Virtue Signaling immediate recognition - Volunteering often goes unrecognized and is a long term commitment - but we know who really cares :)
Thanks. White Brit here. Also here, the white working class is immune to CRT.
Much less stuff about CRT on our airwaves now that we're beset by a cost-of-living crisis, with food banks more popular than ever before. Could be interesting to compare the change in the popularity of the theory in the US and the UK now that there is a wider difference in economic circs.
IMO, CRT has a value as an occasional, well-chosen tool to wake up middle class professionals who have real power to make a big difference e.g. in recruitment practices. But beyond that, it becomes a laser that burns holes in people and relationships.
Why do you think the UK has 2/3rds the per capita income of the USA when adjusted for PPP or cost of living? Is it because the USA has more white privilege than the UK? That the UK performs "blackness"?
Are many Anglo Saxon ethnic English "multiracially and multi-ethnically black"?
Can you elaborate more on what you think the benefits of CRT have been in the UK?
Does CRT offer any color into why Sunni Pakistani male Britons massively socio-economically underperform Ghanaian/Nigerian/Chinese/Jewish/Indian Britons?
Do you think that the massive number of attacks in recent years, and especially in 2022, would have happened against Jews and Indians in England in the absence of CRT?
Do you think that African ancestry Britons would be murdered at 24 times the rate of ethnic english people in the absence of CRT?
Do you think the massive number of violent attacks against liberal muslims by conservative islamists (which partly explains the large number of attacks against African ancestry Britains) would have happened in the absence of CRT?
Is the failure of the Crown Service and other English police agencies to protect people in England from violence and intimidation because of CRT, wokeness, BLM; and the abolish police/prisons, defund the police narrative?
Every now and then, I would say it's good to turn our gaze to the structural foundations of racism in history, for which CRT offers some analysis. It seems to me that CRT has become problematic because it's now being directly applied on the ground, to shape person-to-person interactions in various contexts. And as the writer of the article more eloquently says, the white working class in particular (in both of our countries) ain't gonna wear that. I confess I tried to wear that jacket for a while and that's why I've ended up here, in some saner academic territory.
Michael Chambers, you under estimate the human ego and pride.
Many poor and lower middle class and middle class Americans of caucasian ancestry embrace CRT, critical theory, cultural marxism, post modern wokeness because it tickles their egos. It makes them feel "powerful" and "superior". Its like an emotional cry into the wilderness: "I still matter! My people still matter!".
The real world is a much harsher ego buster. The UK is in rapid socio-economic decline relative to the rest of the world and many parts of Asia.
The USA is doing far better than the UK, but even in the USA:
--the USA use to have over half of global GNP versus a projected 8% of global GNP a generation from now
--the vast majority of the USA's capital stock (land, intellectual property, businesses, financial assets) is expected to owned by outright foreigners within a generation
--even if we restrict ourselves only to US permanent residents, market dominant ethnics and immigrants are rapidly in the process of socio-economically dominating the USA
In the absence of wokeness, isn't it hard for lower middle class and poor anglo saxon ethnic english to process why and how foreigners, immigrants and ethnics are doing so much socio-economically better than they are? Especially when so much of the elite, upper middle class and rich are only a generation or two removed from illiteracy and poverty?
Wokeness allows poor and lower middle class ethnic english the tools to demonize successful Nigerian Britons and Ghanaian Britons as "black white supremacists". And to yell obscenities at Asians, calling them "white," or "multi-racial white supremacists."
How else would you explain how rapidly so many lower middle class Americans of caucasian ethnicity have adopted wokeness?
Thanks for the detailed post. It's hard for me to compare well the UK and US in this area. I don't see any evidence of the demonisation that you allude to at the end of your post. My impression is that wokeness is on the decline in the UK, along with our average living standards. I'll keep my eyes open for evidence of trends in this area
What other than wokeness explains the mass ethnic english complacency, apologia and refusal to take action regarding the mass murder, violent assault and rape of African ancestry Britons?
To repeat:
--African ancestry Britons are 24 times as likely to be murdered in the UK as ethnic english (many of these are liberal muslims being killed by islamists) with hardly a peep from ethnic english
--many African ancestry under age girls are raped by Pakistani sunni British males with hardly a peep from ethnic english
--by many estimates over half of all rapes of females under the age of 18 over the past generation in the UK have been at the hands of Pakistani sunni males, including vast numbers of African ancestry Britons, ethnic english, Indians, Sikhs, Bangladeshis, Chinese (Pakistani Sunni British males often rape and molest Pakistani British females too)
--there are on average over 15 violent attacks a day on liberal muslims from islamists in the UK (many of these are African ancestry liberal muslims) with hardly a peep about it from ethnic english people
--the mass attacks against Jews in the UK for many years, 2022 has been an especially horrible year for Jews in England
--the mass attacks against Indian Britons in England, near daily, often multiple times a day, since May of this year
--mass FGM (female genital mutilation) against British citizen girls
Why in your view are the ethnic english lower middle class and poor silent about all of this? Why aren't they up in arms to defend their fellow country people from violence and threats of violence?
Is the reason wokeness? Because of wokeness do they perhaps see the Nigerians, Ghanaians, Jews, Indians being attacked as "privileged", "affluent" or "multiracially white"? Do they perhaps, deep down, think that they deserve to be attacked?
Why aren't ethnic English people demanding a large increase in police and judicial spending (funded by large tax increases and massive cuts in social spending) to protect their people? Why aren't English people demanding that the police take the gloves off, and use all means necessary to protect people? Including arming the police, loosening the rules of engagement and allowing the police greater freedom to combat crime as they wish?
Why are sunni Pakistani Britons more extreme islamist than Pakistanis in Pakistan? Why are third generation Pakistani sunni Britons more extreme than the second generation sunni Pakistani Britons, which in turn are more extreme than the first generation sunni Pakistani Britons?
Isn't this the fault of the ethnic English people and their wokeness?
Why do ethnic English children do so terrible in primary and secondary schools, Standard Attainment Tests (SATs), GCSE, A-Levels if not for wokeness? Do they imagine they have a "white privilege" which they clearly and obviously don't have? Have they bought into the woke demonization of standardized tests, math and science? By doing terrible in school, aren't ethnic English setting a terrible example to other Britons and lowering their academic performance too?
Sadly the woke demonization of standardized tests, math and science is taking place all over the world. This isn't only an ethnic English problem.
When upper middle class or rich ethnic english speak of "white privilege" why don't other ethnic English tell them:
"Stop lying. You don't have any white privilege. To imply that you do, is to imply that others have less power than you do, which is racism, bigotry, prejudice of the highest order. And clearly inaccurate with respect to socio-economic outcomes. You might have physical health, beauty, mental health, intelligence, class privilege. But these clearly have nothing to do with "white" or "whiteness". Others are powerful and successful too. The rest of the world is rising fast. T"
That makes no sense. According to CRT, if you're white and poor or working class , you must be really dumb and/or lazy to be struggling in a society where everything is supposedly arranged for your benefit. I'm working class and don't know a single working class/poor white person who buys into that shit. I do know a few who are involved in activist groups dominated by college-educated ppl who will repeat CRT dogma to fit in. And successful minorities are much more likely to be seen as beneficiaries of affirmative action, diversity initiatives and discriminatory employment practices (e.g. Indian Americans hiring/promoting other Indians) than "multi-racial white supremacy," which is a concept very few working class ppl have even heard of. Not to mention that according to DEI ideology, they, being white, should benefit from these supposedly white supremacist preferences far more than Nigerian immigrants.
Agree that "White Privilege", "White Fragility" are unscientific concepts.
While "Toxic Masculinity", is overdone by the left and woke, there is some substance to this in my view. I would call it a mental health crisis among many boys and men.
Fantastic piece Quay, my family origins are in Coatsville and South Philly, both very working class areas and I now live in Los Angeles, in a very ethnic neighborhood. I've never been more bewildered by this idea and how its permeated the spaces of elitist institutions and how damaging and dividing it is.
The more I've thought about this issue I think the term White Privilege can mean a few things. First, it can mean the benefits of "whiteness" through generations (all the things listed in that document like self reliance, punctuality, responsibility, diligence, and consistency)--and the benefits for groups of people that instill those qualities into their culture. The success is astounding for many groups, families, and individuals throughout history on doing the right things day in and day out. As you say this approach works for people of all colors.
Then there is a second part of this which is, en masse, white people don't have the "black penalty" which unfortunately many low income blacks have through no fault of their own. They are born into broken homes in very unsafe neighborhoods. They have no role models. Their schools are a joke. They are expected to behave like criminals and are met with apprehension and suspicion by police and would-be employers, neighbors, classmates, etc. They suffer from a "crabs in a bucket" reality and fail to develop or even believe in any of the worthwhile life skills noted above. White people have the privilege of not having to grow up in poor black communities.
I believe there is a penalty for being black in america. I think it is at least to some extent self inflicted. But the idea that the traits of whiteness and responsibility are somehow responsible for or any proximate cuase to that penalty is absurd. It's even more ludicrous that a policy of discouraging all people from acting responsibly would ever cure the rampant destructive behavior in the black community is seriously touted as a theory for bettering our country.
Why in your view do African Americans have a purchasing power parity (adjusted for the cost of living) higher per capita income than people in the UK?
Do you believe that UK citizens have a black penalty that is reducing their per capita income?
Or do you believe that the black penalty only applies to the 1/4th or 1/3rd poorest African Americans? And that the 3/4rs or 2/3rds most affluent African Americans do not have a "black penalty"
Why do you believe that African Americans have twice the per capita income of Somali Americans?
I don't think it's a worthwhile inquiry to compare citizens of the wealthiest nation in the world that also has 330mm population to than smaller and very different countries. It is interesting for purposes of putting things into perspective for how well we have it relative to other places. For purposes of the actual reality of "white privilege" though, it kind of a separate issue.
In the words of Thomas Friedman, "The world is flat."
I think it is entirely fair and legitimate to make these comparisons in a rapidly globalizing world. Especially to condescending, pretentious, patronizing, woke ethnic english toxic saviors in England who continually imply that "blacks" lack "privilege" (which de facto means power and intelligence), and who practice the hard bigotry of low expectations.
If woke ethnic english boast about all this self proclaimed "white privilege", why can't they economically outperform African Americans? Is it possible that African Americans are better than the ethnic English at many things? Maybe the woke English should send a delegation to study African American excellence, capacity, competence, entrepreneurship and success, and take back best practices to England so that the English can become more socio-economically successful?
I think this messaging increases self confidence, afro positivity while fighting afro pessimism and the hard bigotry of low expectations.
To be fair, while African Americans might have a higher mean income than England, African Americans also have more inequality and non income related challenges.
Likely a larger percentage of African Americans are billionaires, 100 millionaires, 10 millionaires, millionaires, upper middle class than people in England. However, sadly, the bottom 40% of English outperform the bottom 40% of African Americans. African Americans also suffer from far more crime victimization and health challenges and K-12 academic challenges than people in England do. :-(
More precisely the bottom 55% to 60% of British people socio-economically the bottom 55%o to 60% of African Americans. However the top 40% of African Americans economically outperform the top 40% of British people, resulting in a "slightly" higher mean income. Both in PPP (adjusted for the cost of living) and in nominal terms.
British people have a higher median (50 percentile) income than African Americans do.
I've kind of lost you here with all the macro stats but to do my best to bring it back to my initial point I would say that the "black penalty" i describe in my initial comment is what you said about disproprortionate crime, health, and K-12 issues that are in many ways self-imposed by other blacks and the surrounding community.
In poor and working class England there is an analogy here. The massive government housing estates in the industrial north of england, scotland, and ireland show a similar pattern to the US government programs that created all of the black urban despair we see today in many US cities. Throw all the poor into housing, do not require them to work (give them welfare), and then watch the violent crime explode, the family break down, and the cycle of despair to persist. Glasgow is a like a white Detroit or Chicago.
To answer a question in your original response I believe that the black penalty applies to poor black communities. It's a mom who wants her son to go to school but he has to walk through a gang infested neighborhood to do it, and then avoid fights at school. I'm not concerned with the black Harvard professor that gets pulled over and cries racism or the black high schooler in an elite school district that is desperate to feel victimized. I'm talking about good people in the worst part of Baltimore or St. Louis that are terrorized by their own community and their local "leaders" are just hustling for more government funds for their own pocket much life a third world nation run by crooks and war lords. Shame on America for not seeing this scam and helping the 95% of these communities that want the best things for themselves. Rather, we indulge the fake cries of race hustlers to assuage our white guilt and, in doing so, just perpetuate the horror.
I would choose slightly different words to describe similar concepts:
"English penalty" explains why ethnic english anglo saxons, Caribbean Britons and Gypsie Britons don't do socio-economically well compared to others, such as Nigerian and Ghanaian Britons.
"that are in many ways self-imposed by other blacks and the surrounding community." I would blame psychological warfare by the English intelligentsia and European intelligentsia for colonizing the minds of people with negativity.
"Throw all the poor into housing, do not require them to work (give them welfare), and then watch the violent crime explode, the family break down, and the cycle of despair to persist. Glasgow is a like a white Detroit or Chicago."
I don't think the vast majority of people in the world, including in Africa, have any idea about how violent St. Louis and Baltimore are. They have war zone or higher per capita homicide rates. How can a 6th grade african american girl do well in school when she is understandably daily terrified that her brothers, sisters, mom, aunties and grandmas will be murdered, raped or assaulted? When she carries a gun to school and back every day to protect herself and her brother and her grandma. And hides her gun in the bushes near her school. [Sadly this is all too common in some parts of the USA.]
Please watch former prison psychiatrist Theodore Dalrymple discuss how crime in many parts of England have increased more than 10 fold per capita:
He travelled through Africa on public transportation and the level of crime in many parts of England is unimaginable in most of Africa. Maybe the English can send a delegation to Africa to learn how to improve mental health and avoid widespread violence and crime?
"terrorized by their own community and their local "leaders" are just hustling for more government funds for their own pocket much life a third world nation run by crooks and war lords. Shame on America for not seeing this scam and helping the 95% of these communities that want the best things for themselves. Rather, we indulge the fake cries of race hustlers to assuage our white guilt and, in doing so, just perpetuate the horror."
Wish I could disagree with this. But it is all true.
Many of the worst performing public schools in the USA spend an insanely high amount of money per student. :-(
Sadly too many upper middle class Americans and businesses are in on the grift. They make a fortune "servicing" the supposedly marginalized, harming many in the process.
White privilege is a Kafka Trap. It cannot therefore be discussed or debated. It’s also as obviously racist and demeaning to non-white people as it’s possible to be. Probably best ignored as an idea, which is difficult when narcissistic sociopaths are building their reputations on it.
Well written! Thank you for sharing your thoughts and history.
It is amazing to me how the Woke Religion has spread here in America. It's like fire spreading under water. I attribute it to the totalitarian nature of the belief system, and it's hierarchy. Folks get sucked in by the "science" and then it's all competition to be wokest, to ascend the hierarchy. Very similar to how communism was fetishized about 100 years ago. And add a layer of globalist power manipulating that for their own anti-human goals.
I think we're gonna be ok tho. Might be rough getting there.
"launch of a fund to help Black students thrive at Oxford University . . . The AJ Tracey Fund aims to address “historic underrepresentation” at Oxford, the top university in the UK. Working with St Peter’s College, Tracey, 28, hopes to attract students from underrepresented backgrounds and provide support to help them succeed, from financial assistance to mentorship opportunities."
I don't follow.
Is he trying to increase the representation of Ethnic English anglo saxon students at Oxford because they are under represented similar to how Malaysia gives preferences to the majority population via Bumiputera. [Maybe this idea deserves consideration.]
Four groups heavily over represented are Jews, Chinese, Indians and Nigerians. Does he want to reduce Oxford's over representation of these four market dominant minorities?
"when fellow rapper Stormzy announced a scholarship for Black students at Cambridge, trolls branded him racist and “anti-white”. “It’s crazy,” Tracey says, rolling his eyes. “At the end of the day, a large portion of the population is always going to have a very uneducated and misguided view on these kinds of happenings. Even if I were to say, ‘Yeah, I want to help every student, not just Black or ethnic students’, they’ll just say it’s a PR stunt."
I am even more confused. How is helping under represented groups = "racist" and "anti-white"?
"“I think, in general, for anyone who doesn’t understand why Black people who have managed to become successful want to help Black kids, it should be self-explanatory. The whole country is catered towards white people and we’re just trying to level the playing field by helping Black kids.”"
What does "black" mean?
Is he trying to reduce the representation of market dominant minorities such as Nigerians and Ghanaians and increasing the representation of under represented Caribbean Britons and Somali Britons? Where would other specific ethnicities within the superset of African Britons fit into this?
How is "under represented" connected to "marginalized"? What does "marginalized" mean in the real world?
" The whole country is catered towards white people" I am getting more and more confused. What does this mean? Don't ethnic English anglo saxons socio-economically under perform BAME in England? Is he referring to non economic issues such as cultural awareness and integration? If he wants to help marginalized and under represented people, doesn't this mean he wants to help ethnic English, maybe via a Bumiputera type system? and then maybe expanding the definition of ethnic English to include other under represented groups such as gypsies, Somali Britons and Caribbean Britons?
"we’re just trying to level the playing field by helping Black kids." Don't follow. Does he mean that Nigerians and Ghanaians would vastly socio-economically outperform everyone else in a true meritocracy versus only moderately socio-economically outperform others? If this is true, why are the English shooting themselves in the foot by not identifying, developing and retaining more Caribbean and African British talent?
"“I truly believe that I had the potential to go [to Oxford or Cambridge],” he says. “But it was just understood that if you’re from an impoverished upbringing or ethnic background it’s very hard to get in. Even if you’re intelligent, even if you know you can get those grades, it just feels out of reach. Unfortunately, the society that we live in, you know, it doesn’t favour people from a background like me. It’s not a sob story, it just is what it is.”"
I am lost. Does the UK have mass affirmative action based on race and ethnicity? Mass affirmative action based on socio-economic status? Why wouldn't Oxbridge and the Russel Group go out of their way to attract as much poor and lower middle class talent as possible?
"The other key aim of the fund will be supporting students once they are at Oxford. “Obviously, being a minority in England is one thing, but then being a minority at your place of education is quite difficult. Obviously, if they live in Oxford as well then they’re also a minority there. So just basically in every category, they’re a minority and that’s always going to be hard,” he says. Support will be awarded from the fund on a case-by-case basis, including for practical things – like train tickets or other expenses to “support the student experience of those from low-income backgrounds”.
Again, I am not understanding. Oxbridge is full of low income Jewish, Chinese, Indian and Nigerian children. Aren't they doing amazing? Aren't they dominating the affluent ethnic english students? Why would it be hard to dominate or excel in an environment as a minority? Isn't England and the world as a whole chock full of market dominant minorities that thrive as minorities?
"Working with St Peter’s, which is unusual among Oxford colleges for having had Black undergraduates since its foundation in 1929, was a natural choice. “They specifically try to get people more of a mixed background, and they’re already working on that task. So for me, it felt like a no-brainer, if the train is already up and running, to help it go,” Tracey says. “I didn’t just walk in there and think, ‘Let me just randomly sling money at a random cause, you know.” Judith Buchanan, head of the college, said she was “delighted to have AJ Tracey in our world”. “With his generous support we look forward to seeing current and future talented Black students flourish in their time here,” she said."
Interesting.
Tracey is optimistic about the impact the fund could have. “Success can be even as small as the current students saying that their time [at Oxford] was a lot easier,” Tracey says. “But who knows? I don’t mean to be one of these eternal optimists but, genuinely, one of these kids that we’re talking to right now could just be the next prime minister. If they become prime minister and make the country 100 times better and then say, ‘You know what helped me a little bit? When I was at uni, AJ Tracey’…” he trails off."
Love this!
"As well as helping individuals, Tracey sees his role as positively affecting the culture at Oxford. Discussions about the curriculum and the calls for the removal of a statue of the British imperialist Cecil Rhodes, which sparked national debate, are the types of conversation to which he might contribute. “For me it’s about gauging how the Black students feel about that. When I’ve got my foot in the door, these are all things that I can go and talk to them about,” he says. “I don’t want to be on the outside, trying to tell people what to do with the establishment. I need to be inside trying to make a difference.”"
Wouldn't anti imperialism include renouncing marxism, socialism, structuralism, post modernism, subaltern studies, orientalism, critical theory which were weaponized by the English imperialists to do immense damage to societies all over the world during the empire?
You lay bare the fallacy of Wokeism which -- ironically -- is a philosophy which does make race the most important aspect of life. The concept of race has been expanded to include and exclude people. Gays, like I am, are oppressed and hence are oppressed by the racism system. Jews, on the other hand, are oppressors since we Jews are all fabulously wealthy. Well, only we Gay Jews are "fabulously" wealthy, while other Jews are merely wealthy.
Thanks for adding some clear thinking to a subject which has gone nutzy coo-coo.
When the USA and global woke use the phrase "white privilege" or "whiteness" or "white supremacy", do they really mean non Sub-Saharan ancestry?
Are latinos, arabs and asians included as part of "whiteness"?
I *think* this is what the woke generally mean. If so, why use the phrase "white" versus non subsaharan African ancestry?
++++++++++++++++++++
MA, the UK is starting to develop four market dominant minorities:
--Jews
--Chinese
--Indians
--Nigerians (don't have the data for Ghanaians, but perhaps Ghanaians are part of this too)
All of these groups **MASSIVELY** socio-economically outperform anglo saxon ethnic english. The Nigerian diaspora is also very successful around the world, including South Africa, Canada, USA, other African countries, etc. [Would be very curious to see the data on Nigerian socio-economic success in China, Singapore, Malaysia, Hong Kong, India, UAE, Israel, Mexico, Central America, South America].
In the opinion of the global woke, is this because Nigerian Britons practice "whiteness", "white privilege", "white supremacy", "hate", "oppression", "exploitation", "hegemony", "nazism/fascism", "alt right", "patriarchy", "the man -ism", "corporations", "capitalism" etc.?
If the answer to this question is "YES", then should every poor person in the world to practice "whiteness", "white privilege", "white supremacy", "hate", "oppression", "exploitation", "hegemony", "nazism/fascism", "alt right", "patriarchy", "the man -ism", "corporations", "capitalism" etc.? Would this dramatically lower global poverty?
The CRT "take" is that we need to tease out the effect of whiteness so we all get it into our thick skulls that even the most unfortunate white person benefits from his whiteness and would be in an even worse position without it. The problems with that academic venture are well explained in the article.
Al these -isms offer some kind of academic frame of reference to view general trends in society and history and need to be held lightly - if they have any merit at all (which e.g Nazism doesn't). So I'm Ok with CRT advocates socking it to the white liberal middle classes with their theories when there is real data on discriminatory practices (e.g. in recruitment) and see what comes out in the wash.
"I'm Ok with CRT advocates socking it to the white liberal middle classes with their theories when there is real data on discriminatory practices (e.g. in recruitment) and see what comes out in the wash."
Why is CRT useful for this? What you are describing is a market failure, or stupidity, which if unaddressed, will accelerate the relative socio-economic collapse of England relative to the rest of the world.
The whole world is vigorously competing to identify, develop and retain talent and skilled labor. If England or the ethnically English people fail at this, then England and the ethnic English people will be hurt far more than anyone else.
The person or persons or groups being discriminated against will probably do just fine, or better than fine. The world is flat. The world is a meritocracy. Discriminated against people can leave England, or simply network with non ethnic English businesses and people, and have an amazing career or business that way.
The world and other groups will do fine economically if ethnic English people want to be poor and unsuccessful.
There are situations where people are not given interviews because of their foreign name or e.g. obviously Muslim cultural background, or pretty white girls are disproportionately recruited by middle aged males. (I have seen that in action - until HR stepped in) In such cases, the world is not always a meritocracy. Equality laws have a role there, as well as awareness training for recruiters and I would expect awareness of structural racism to play some role in that kind of training.
These would be market failures. Businesses and people who behave like this will be competed away in the free markets. And replaced the other businesses and people who are more meritocratic.
Trust in freedom. Trust in free markets. Trust in people.
Perhaps what you are referring to is what economists call information asymmetry. If talent is not being identified, developed and retained . . . lets improve the process. Or else we will be replaced by people with better access to information.
In the USA Indian American muslims are **EXTREMELY** socio-economically successful. In the entire USA only Jews and nonmuslim Indians socio-economically compare with them.
Is the same true in England?
I think we should get rid of many existing equality and protected classes laws. And most supposedly marginalized people will do better than people expect.
If we look within muslims, shia make more than sunnis. And within shia, sixers (ishmaelis) make more than twelvers. And among the sixer Ishmaeli, the Bohra do particularly well. Being a type of global Jewry in terms of success, creativity and open mindedness.
Given the massive differences in socio-economic success between different groups of muslims, maybe "muslim names" is not as big of an obstacle as many think.
Having said this, there is an issue if people conflate liberal successful cultured muslims with very conservative islamist Pakistani Sunni Britons. or with very conservative islamist sunni Somali Britons. (Many Pakistanis and Somalis are not very conservative sunni islamists.)
Are you referring to obstacles for lower middle income employment and businesses, which are different from more affluent, globalized and cosmopolitan parts of society?
"or pretty white girls are disproportionately recruited by middle aged males." This is 100% true. There is a lot of economic literature about the socio-economic value of "beauty privilege". To the degree possible economists prefer data sets that have a quantitative estimate of "beauty". Males also have this privilege, albeit to a smaller degree.
I am not sure what can be done about this. But cultural marxism, critical theory, CRT, wokeness are terrible ways of studying, understanding and reacting to this phenomenon.
How would you make the world more meritocratic?
I think globalization is making the world more meritocratic. If the English people choose to be less meritocratic than other peoples, then this will accelerate the drop in the percentage of global income and wealth accruing to the English people. Ergo, the English people need to figure out how to improve the meritocracy right quick.
Thomas Sowell has views mirroring yours, I think. As far as I know, Pakistani-origin Brits are fast catching up with white Brits in terms of educational attainment. Bangladeshi-origin Brits are still behind. But I haven't checked.
I can agree that if markets cure problems organically and gradually, then it's better to leave them to do just that, but I don't think that they always do. Look at the roots of the 2008 economic crisis, which were extreme lack of regulation.
I think there are barriers to many private sector professional jobs for Muslims in particular because they are feared, and usually don't drink or hobnob with white British clients in the customary manner. I don't think the markets have cured that. Any hiring manager worth his or her salt should be ready to examine their own personal prejudices and the cultural practices of their organisations and adapt them to be as litigation-proof as possible. In that context, a dose of CRT shock therapy may work wonders.
Bangladeshis considerably outperform Pakistani and ethnic English academically.
The country of Bangladesh use to be much poorer than the country of Pakistan 1971 to 1974. Pakistanis killed perhaps 3 million and raped millions of Bangladeshis in a genocide in 1971; destroying the Bangladeshi economy. Perhaps 1.5 million Bangladeshis starved to death in 1974. Today Bangladesh significantly economically outperforms Pakistan, and the Bangladeshi economy grows much faster than the Pakistani economy; resulting in a rapidly increasing ratio of [ (per capita Bangladesh income) / (per capita Pakistani income) ].
There are large differences in performance between different Pakistani subgroups with shia doing better than sunni. Shia almost certainly are also far less likely to rape or molest someone or go to prison or be islamist extremist. Although I don't know how to look up the precise data on this.
"Look at the roots of the 2008 economic crisis, which were extreme lack of regulation." Long conversation needed on this. We probably either need a single global financial regulator or very complex models of correlations and interconnections with high transparency and extremely close coordination between different global regulators. In many ways the world increasingly has a single global financial system.
"I think there are barriers to many private sector professional jobs for Muslims in particular because they are feared, and usually don't drink or hobnob with white British clients in the customary manner." Trying to say this delicately. This is far more a problem for the English people, than for muslims. Muslims have plenty of academic, business and career opportunities outside of Briton. And if muslims exercise those options, muslims will do just fine. The English people will not.
Are you implying that it is easier for muslims to have successful businesses, careers and social lives in Hong Kong, China, Malaysia, Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea, Thailand, India, Indonesia, Canada, Dubai, USA, Germany, Netherland, Switzerland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Estonia, Luxembourg, Belgium, Ireland, Sweden, Slovenia, Czech Republic, Lithuania, Malta, Latvia, Poland than in England?
One of the problems leading to negative stereotypes against muslims inside the UK is the way the UK woke and UK hard left backs islamists against liberal muslims. Liberal muslims in the UK are too scared to openly speak. And this creates the perception that islamists are a larger percentage of the UK muslim population than they actually are. This, along with shariah courts and schools in England based on very conservative fiqhs (there are also liberal muslim fiqh shariahs with the UK chooses not to implement) leads to the brainwashing of British muslim children with islamism. The longer a muslim family stays in the UK the more islamist or conservative (islamist is a subset within the superset of conservative) they become on average.
This is why UK muslims are more conservative and islamist tilting than muslims in many other countries, including many muslim majority countries.
The English people need to look in the mirror and examine themselves. Why did tens of thousands of their fellow British citizens travel to many foreign countries to join Daesh and AQ based networks?
Sadly the flattening and negation of muslim diversity in favor of very conservative sameness, has created negative stereotypes and problems for muslims inside the UK.
If the UK wants to address this challenge, back liberal muslims. Sharply increase police funding and protect liberal muslims inside the UK. Encourage liberal muslims to speak publicly. Encourage dialogue with islamists. Arrest, convict and incarcerate many tens of thousands of British nationals for honor violence, FGM, violence and intimidation against liberal British muslims. Make it clear that no honor violence, FGM or other violence or threats against liberal UK muslims will be tolerated, full stop. (Using English idiom.)
Whatever the cost, whatever the blowback, however many scores or hundreds of UK police officers die in the cause of freedom, the UK will fight until every liberal UK muslim is safe.
To quote Churchill: "we shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end, we shall fight . . . on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this Island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God’s good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old."
Don't the CRT people also argue that successful Nigerian and Ghanaian Britons are "white", benefit from "white privilege" and perhaps practice "white supremacy"?
Briahna Joy Gray when she was a practicing lawyer in greater LA and NYC use to frequently be called "white" by her ethnically caucasian collogues as an insult. She had continued to be dogged by these accusations in her political career. Including as Bernie's campaign manager.
The people accusing BJG of being white" and practicing "whiteness" are never or almost never of African ancestry.
It is common for children of caucasian ethnicity in the USA to accuse African american children who do well in K-12 of "acting white", being "white" or performing "whiteness."
I suspect similar views are held by CRT activists here but I've never heard of them coming from children or being bandied around the workplace. Sounds awful. Sorry to hear about it, in fact. If that's widespread, it sounds like CRT has done a lot more damage in the USA than here.
When asked why Nigerian Britons are economically and socio-economically much more successful than other Britons, what do critical theory woke post modern SJWs say?
Do they go on an attack vector against Nigerian Britons?
When asked why African ancestry Britons are 24 times as likely to be murdered as ethnic English, critical theory woke post modern SJWs say? Don't have the exact numbers, but the ratio is similar or even higher when holding academic performance and income constant. [Since African ancestry Britons academically outperform ethnic English and earn about the same amount of money. Maybe slightly more. However, if Nigerians and Ghanaians are taken out of the sample, African ancestry Britons under perform ethnic English.]
When asked why there are so many violent attacks against liberal muslims by islamists in the UK, what do critical theory woke post modern SJWs say? Why don't the English police and broader English society protect "THEIR" liberal muslims? Liberal muslim British are as British as any other Briton. And share a common heart, soul, culture and family?
When asked why in 2022 there have been so many violent attacks against Jews and Indians, what do critical theory woke post modern SJWs say?
Would it be fair to say that the extreme violence against African ancestry Britons, liberal muslims, and to a lesser degree Jews and Indians is partly because the UK police has pulled back since Michael Brown in 2014?
On your last para, you may be right. It's so hard to assess. The national inquiry that found "institutional racism" in the Met must have had an impact on policing practices too.
As we both know, parcelling out the impact of racism on multifactorial disadvantages across societal groups is notoriously difficult, which of course suits CRT followers. But even if evidence against the impact of racism was statistically compelling, I guess most would not change their beliefs.
It seems easier to me to show a number of individual instances of a similar kind of racism, where analysis is easier, like in the recruitment scenarios I've mentioned, and then tentatively extrapolate that there must be a structural force at play. That might be the best level of statistical certainty reached on some issues, but still worthy of consideration.
It's clear that the colonial project makes little distinction for colour. Assimilation through debt bondage applies to all, and if you cannot access the finance then you simply can't assimilate.
I was hired by IBM in 1978. It took 3 interviews. At the last interview one of the field managers came up to me acting kind of nervous and I'm thinking, "What's the matter now?"
He says to me, "You know you'll have to shave off your beard!"
I just shrugged my shoulders and said, "Money is more important than hair." He was all smiles after that. I got the job as a Customer Engineer.
So I was flown to Atlanta for 10 weeks of training. I had been an audio tech trouble shooting to the transistor level so it was like a 2 month vacation. I got a 12% raise when I came back for being near the top of the class.
That is when I met Bob. He had been off with a back problem when I was interviewed and after coming back from sick leave while I was in Atlanta he had a Full Beard. Mine had been like Malcolm X. Bob was an old IBMer, pushing 60 and white of course. I didn't say anything and let six months go by.
I got 2 weeks off and grew my beard back. The result was hilarious. Bob had been constantly getting jokes about his beard. Mine was invisible. Nobody said nuthin. Except Bob.
The shaving thing is a constant in Japan actually. You will rarely find a guy working with a beard. However, this also sounds a bit like seniority. Was Bob the only other bearded person?
Yes, I don't really know what the story behind it was. Maybe he just decided that he was old enough and didn't give a shit. He was probably pushing 60 which I thought was OLD. LOL
" “White privilege” is sometimes described as “not having to think about your skin colour” as you navigate daily life. I understand this idea, but I’ve always argued that it depends where you are."
This is a really interesting point. I live in the countryside of the UK as an African and I was always aware of how I looked when I was out and about. And noticed I didn't think about my skin when I was around people who looked like "me". I couldn't articulate this feeling until I read somewhere that it was because of white supremacy since white people don't experience that. Which now as an adult I realise is completely stupid. I live in England, home of the English. And the dominant culture is theirs. The same way I don't think about my physical differences when surrounded by my ethnicity, they don't think about theirs surrounded by their ethnicity. The same is true for every country and the dominating ethnicity. The answer to why I felt this way was so simple, looking back at it, that it's borderline funny.
It's just part of being human, noticing obvious surface level (emphasis here) differences. To be completely candid, I used to get stuck on these differences and turned a collective of individuals into a caricature. Yet when I saw people who looked like me. African or Muslim etc. I saw them as human, nothing more attached to that. It wasn't until I heard about how people outside of this "group" saw us, that I was completely floored and reflected on the stereotypes I held about others.
I remember a "white" American joking with me that his son (who I'm friends with) should be careful because if he sees my hair, he'll have to marry me! I found it hilarious because I've never heard that before and didn't know people thought that. I had a similar reaction when an English man on a train told me to stop listening to the patriarch of my family, not knowing I was the eldest daughter of a bereaved widow. There was no patriarch. It's just funny to be in these (isolated and infrequent) situations because it takes me outside of myself.
Just a really good point you made, combatting that baseless claim and emphasising looking at the individual. Which is one of the best ways to dissipate any subconscious biases one has unknowingly placed on a "group". And when you do meet someone vastly physically, culturally different to you, see them as one person from x y z background. Not that background itself. And when I do meet someone that is racist, who is racialised as white, I try and combat my knee jerk reaction and imagine the roles reversed (I know, hated term). But imagining them as a racist from my ethnicity helps me see them more clearly. Weird, no real threat and more importantly a human who's behaving "badly". Not a bad person.
Great comment!
Hi fellow Brit. Thanks for your comment. I knew a Ugandan doctor some years ago in London and he had no inferiority complex about being black but being here and observing Afro-Caribbean culture, he really felt deep compassion for them and their problems. He could see that he had some advantages as someone whose ancestors hadn't been uprooted from their culture and enslaved. Do you have any thoughts you'd be willing to share on this? Best wishes
Hi!
I agree with that Ugandan doctor. I am from Somalia and my people weren't enslaved either, so I will say that I don't have that pain of enslavement by another ethnicity as a West Indie person might. Although I think Afro- Caribbean people are still individuals who, if in the UK, still have opportunities. Of course, it's never that simple. People don't have to succeed if we're being realistic or could be impacted by personal or location problems.
Even though my country went through colonialism by 3 European powers (one of them being the Brits) and was impacted by the soviets in the past and currently American bombing, the modern problems we face is a culmination of outside, historical blame but also largely self-blame too. We need a better political system and better leaders and less internal corruption! Easier said than done.
And I will say, I'm very lucky to still have my Somali culture intact and that was never eradicated throughout our history. The most, I can think is some Italian words used in Somali. And of course, cultures are always changing but it was never largely (emphasis here) influenced by the Brits, Italians or French.
There are huge opportunities in the UK. I may face some backwards comments every so often but that doesn't even begin to impact my legal rights or the advantages I have here. Someone telling me to go back to my country doesn't magically locate me to my country. They're emotionally disturbing themselves and can drive themselves mad, but they can't physically remove me. They're human beings and humans behave badly. And I drive myself insane demanding that they shouldn't. I can't control that.
To be completely honest, they have a right to think that way. Who am I to control how other people think. As long as it's not physical I'm okay, and I've never had it be physical.
I think people are distracted honestly. Both racists and "woke" people alike. They're fighting air and more importantly they're fighting reality.
I think Africans don't tend to be self-hating and are sometimes prideful to a fault lol. I've never heard anyone in my family call themselves oppressed, there are some racial disparities here in the UK of course, but there are so many ways to propel ourselves out. And I'd go even further to argue that the racial disparities tend to be based on economic issues at the core. And that's the root of the problem that people tend to ignore because they're distracted.
"I think Africans don't tend to be self-hating"
This makes Africans very different from Europeans, North Americans, South Americans and Asians. How have Africans achieved this? What can the rest of the world learn from Africans to avoid self hatred?
"and are sometimes prideful to a fault lol."
Very good!
"I've never heard anyone in my family call themselves oppressed,"
Would it be accurate that most people who think they are oppressed live in Europe and North America? If so, why is this? Why do the woke want to colonize the minds of others with inferiority complex to damage self confidence, keep them down and manipulate them into thinking they are oppressed?
Why do so many Europeans and North Americans have so little self worth, self satisfaction and self confidence? Where does the inferiority complex come from?
"there are some racial disparities here in the UK of course, but there are so many ways to propel ourselves out. "
Are ethnic English taught this? Taught that they can be successful too? And do as well socio-economically as BAME? Do as well as immigrants? Do as well as ethnics?
"And I'd go even further to argue that the racial disparities tend to be based on economic issues at the core. And that's the root of the problem that people tend to ignore because they're distracted."
Would you say that the "disparities" or socio-economic outcomes are largely driven by broadly defined physical health, broadly defined mental health, broadly defined intelligence, and what the great economist Glenn Loury calls "relations before transactions" (or one's company and social relations and social circle)?
Do the English people understand that the world is moving at lightning speed and unless Britain keeps up, the UK can quickly fall technologically behind?
I don't think Africans are that thin skinned to be honest. We tend to be very blunt and very jokey people. It's hilarious whenever we're met with insults, it's not something we take to heart and to be honest, the older generation have seen and gone through so much crap, it's light comedy for them when the worst they get in the west is insults. I will say maybe that's changing for the younger generation who's influenced by their western upbringing and becoming more sensitive.
I remember once telling my mother I didn't like my nose and she laughed saying what can you do, LMAO. Best advice she could give me, I accepted it from that day on.
I always joke Somalis are so prideful that we see no other worthy opponent, so we turn on each other. Not a good thing though.
"Why do the woke want to colonize the minds of others with inferiority complex to damage self confidence, keep them down and manipulate them into thinking they are oppressed?"
No idea. I think they're influenced themselves and are found in a closed belief trap and naturally try to "enlighten" others. Maybe they're kids who start to notice disparities, imagined or not, and haven't thought about things hard enough or considered the bigger picture.
Or maybe they're people who identify with a mostly emotional explanation about the world. Or see their personal problems in a group context and thrive off that validation.
I don't think their motivations are insidious, I think they're trying to do good but fail at some aspects.
"Are ethnic English taught this?"
No idea lol. I guess so. But you know, people don't have to succeed or maybe they're content with less. It could be individual or maybe it's just location.
" Glenn Loury calls "relations before transactions""
Sounds interesting, I'm going to look into this.
"UK can quickly fall technologically behind?"
We're very aware of our economic problems in this country. The entire country is going through it now and it's one of our top priorities fortunately.
Do you reference African immigrants in England or African Britons versus Caribbean Britons?
If so, how would you describe the differences between Haitian vs Jamaican vs Dominican Republic vs Bahamas vs Guyana vs Trinidad & Tobago vs Igbo vs Somali vs Ghanaian vs Kenyan vs Tanzanian vs South African vs Nigerian Britons?
Thanks for an informative post. I got to know something of Somali culture when editing a book of the oral histories of 5 Somali origin women living in England. It was a real eye opener for me. I learnt so much. It's also given me some insight into the issues for Somali people in getting on in British life.
On a separate issue, one of the issues raised by the UN is that so much more attention and money is being devoted to Ukraine when there are so many other humanitarian catastrophes in the world - Pakistan, Afghanistan, Eritrea, whole horn of Africa. Can one tease out a racist element here? Or even if one can, is there any point and it's just a Q of those that see the need for a greater profile for those areas doing some more work?
IMO I think it's fair to shine a brighter spotlight on media, politics and international organisation on the issue of structural racism and how it produces worse outcomes for Asians and Africans in need compared to Ukrainians. I don't have a problem with CRT proponents contributing here. Of course, they don't have the complete answer - no one does. Thanks for reading my thoughts
That's really cool that you got to become familiar with Somali culture in that type of setting! :) Also, not all but most of our history is recited orally!
About the issue that the UN raised, I really do think that how you process that information is based on perspective! There is a tactful way to present a factual issue but there's only so much you can do, and people will interpret it depending on their belief system.
So, in that regard, I can understand why someone might see it as insensitive and or flirting with the line of racism. It will always rub some (emphasis here) people the wrong way when you say, to paraphrase very loosely, "hey I know this problem is really bad but don't forget about x y z".
But I didn't see it that way. I didn't see anyone advocating for stopping or cutting down donations to Ukraine but to focus on the issue of funding being spread too thin. Forget the current examples, but this has been an issue for a while when it comes to humanitarian causes, so it makes sense why people want to find a better way going forward.
Because it is natural that an issue with more media spotlight will receive more funding, and other countries will suffer because of that. It is a common problem. So, I don't think anyone should take it personally, the problem now just includes these current examples. The UN is there to maintain security and peace, so it is their role to focus on several nations not just one.
So, I'm in agreement with you there! I do think that there is an element of desensitisation to horrendous conditions in Asia and Africa compared to Europe. I think that's fair to say. I do have a lot of criticisms of CRT but when it comes to these more continental issues, some elements of CRT could be lifted to explain this phenomena.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts! :)
"So, I'm in agreement with you there! I do think that there is an element of desensitisation to horrendous conditions in Asia and Africa compared to Europe."
When North West Europeans talk about this, is this a way to help overcome their deep fear and insecurity about the very rapid decline in the share of global wealth and income that they have. The rapid rise of the rest?
Ukraine is the poorest country in Europe has a comparable level of socio-economic development to Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Vietnam, Indonesia, Fiji, Iraq, India, Jordan, Jamaica, Lebanon, Philippines, El Salvador. Uzbekistan, Laos. Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, Mongolia.
Ukraine is a rentier country financed by international aid or international welfare. [As is Haiti, many African countries, Cuba, North Korea, West Bank, Gaza, Nicaragua, Nepal, Afghanistan and many other countries] Ukraine desperately needs help. [And I would argue a quick peace agreement with Russia on terms acceptable to Russia.]
Thanks. Yes, Somali culture and people are wonderful. The traditions from nomadic times are very interesting and totally outside my experience.
Just to add to your final comment - it's almost as if the only kind of CRT-related contribution to that debate that could help would be one from someone who is not a convinced believer in CRT. Most true believers in CRT, IMO, brook no compromise in the universal application of their beliefs and find it hard to take on board other viewpoints, so it's hard to give anything they say any credence, even when sometimes it does have some credence.
Agreed. When a lot of people say they disagree with CRT, it's met with a knee jerk reaction of people seeing us going the complete other direction, when truly we just want a better way to explain history and current problems. Less lazy, sweeping unprovable interpretations.
Which is why, I wish Dr Sheena Mason's theory of racelessness would gain more popularity. And her idea of how to teach histories especially ones concerning oppression of one ethnic group with the other. You should check her out if you haven't already!
Don't Asians in general do socio-economically well? Which is why there aren't many political refugees from asia aside from a small number of countries?
Ukraine is a lower middle income country socio-economically similar to Iraq, Jordan, Jamaica, El Salvadore, Philippines, Lebanon, Guatemala, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Ecuador, Bolivia, Uzbekistan, Laos, India.
Globally there is a not of anti Pakistani sentiment because of the Pakistani Army's support for terrorism and islamist extremism all over the world.
The Pakistani Army de facto invaded and destroyed Afghanistan in 2021, with a far bit of international support. Since the world backed Pakistan against Afghanistan, it is no surprise the world does not want Afghan refugees. Afghans have been abandoned, betrayed and turned upon.
There is also a lot of global anti Somali sentiment.
Why did you mention Eritrea? Because of the Tigray war (which ended in a military victory by Ethiopia and Eritrea)? Isn't Eritrea generally at peace?
The role of conservative sunni Pakistanis in grooming gangs in Greece, Denmark, Norway, Australia, Italy, France, Spain, Germany, UK has led to a global backlash. There is also a backlash against Pakistani migrants/immigrants in Saudi Arabia, UAE, Oman, Qatar, Bahrain, South Africa, Kuwait, Australia, Malaysia, China, Iran.
Asked you a question above.
Would you say that you are culturally "English"? If not, would you say that you are trying to be culturally "English"?
Would you agree that many parts of the UK have their own subcultures? Does "English Culture" mean very different things in different parts of England?
Is the greater London metropolitan area "culturally English" in your opinion?
I've been in the UK since I was 2. I was in London up until age 13 and up until now, I've been living in west Yorkshire in the north of England.
I would define "British" as someone who lives and resides in the UK. I would define "English" differently depending on context. And one of my definitions is that the English are the native ethnics of England.
So yes, I'm British, a side of me culturally is British and that is influenced by the English (naturally since I live in England) in terms of how I communicate etc. So, whilst I'm not ethnically English, I am influenced by the English. So yes, culturally part of me is English.
If I were to reside in Scotland, I'd be British technically (even though due to history, some Scots wouldn't like to be grouped with the English as they see it as a forced homogeny) and influenced by the Scottish. Therefore, part of me will be Scottish culturally.
When I talk with Scottish or Irish people, I usually try and be more specific and say I'm English, to locate where in the UK I'm from.
Following my last point, what it means to be British greatly differs depending on where you are. That's why the definition is people who reside in the UK. I will say that British and English are conflated depending on context.
You will get different definitions of what it means to be British, from the Scots, Irish, Welsh, southern England, midlands, northern England. etc.
The English ethnicity, however, does influence Brits in England. And therefore, I am influenced by the English culturally. Ethnic English people do differ in some respects depending on location, so where in England you are, you will most likely be influenced by that English subculture. I've been influenced by London and also over the years by West Yorkshire. And I've been seen as the other place whenever I communicate with either resident.
Many parts of the UK do have their own subcultures. Absolutely! There are noticeable differences depending on where you live. Accents and slang words differ, as well as how open or more reserved people are. I've noticed that slang words in more ethnically diverse cities tend to be influenced by the West Indies, Africans and Arabs. Compared to their less diverse counterparts.
I think that English culture does mean different things depending on where you reside. Despite them all being ethnically English. So, some tend to identify more on their location. Example: "I'm from Liverpool", "I'm from Newcastle" etc. And I will say that even if they are English natives, some may be Anglo-Saxons or Anglo-Celtic. And are influenced by that too. (The Welsh) But I'm not too educated on that. And no one really identifies by that. Maybe people in Cornwell.
It's unfair to say a London English person is the same as a Yorkshire English person. There are similarities of course, the holidays they celebrate, the foods they eat but there are differences in how they communicate or how they were raised. This is evident by light-hearted jokes that northerners make about southerners.
Same goes for other ethnicities, residing in different areas of the UK. For example, a Kenyan raised in Liverpool might share a lot of similarities with a Kenyan raised in London but there will be differences in experience due to which English subculture they were influenced by.
And it's unfair to say someone from Northern Ireland is similar to someone from England (could cause issues lol), despite both technically being Brits.
I will go further and say that there are differences within cities, or within regions.
Based on my own observations, in bigger cities more ethnic minorities would say that they're British without any objections because there are more hyphenated British cultures there. I've always considered myself British. It's not until I moved into a rural area where there were more Ethnic English, where I felt maybe I don't have the right to say I'm British, even though I am. But I will say I was young and confused and now realise, I just didn't relate to that part of England since I was from the south. That's all. That doesn't make them more British and me less. Since there isn't one concrete definition.
Whether the greater London metropolitan area is culturally English greatly depends where in London they're from lol and what their ethnicity is. Some are less surrounded by a mix of ethnicities and maybe are influenced more by English culture (Essex). But everyone in London is British and London is in England, so therefore they are influenced by the English as well as the mix of cultures there.
I will say that I'm the same. A mix of cultures. Which makes sense. I'm not trying to be culturally English, a part of me is. And a part of me isn't because I'm not ethnically English. That's fine.
I hope this helps and hope you keep in mind that these are my personal thoughts and feelings. And that someone else may think differently.
Very interesting. Thanks for sharing.
How do you think Ethnic English will adjust as more and more of England is owned by foreigners and as more of the Ethnic elites, upper middle class and rich are immigrants or BAME?
My parents were Scottish but I grew up in London. My dad actually gave me an inferiority complex about being English rather than Scottish! So I was determined to be English and not Scottish. Of course, the differences are slight.
In my experience, one area which remains friendly, less changed by modern media culture, and where the people are at ease with each other is rural / small town Lancashire. Essex is also nice - lots of Cockney-origin extraverts there. I also like Brummies. Where are you from?
If I receive the full benefits of the law and have my civil rights respected how is that "privilege"? If people respect me in public and treat me fairly how is that "privilege"? If the police don't mistreat me how is that "privilege"?
Aren't all these things just the baseline standard of civilization? Aren't all these things simply the way liberal democracy should operate instead of an invisible form of apartheid? Shouldn't the issue be that certain people or groups are not receiving these benefits of civilization and how to rectify that?
This reminds me of a story I read about the Soviet Union:
"It’s 1917, and an old lady hears a commotion in the street.
“What is happening?” she asks her maid.
“Oh, it’s so exciting! They are protesting in the street!”
“What do they want?” the old lady asks.
“They want for there to be no more rich people!” says the maid excitedly.
The old lady sighs. “In my day they protested too, but back then they wanted for there to be no more poor people.”
This is always where Leftism ends up: pointing out some form of inequality or oppression, first trying to lift those on a lower level upwards, realizing how difficult that is, then quickly moving on to what really gets the blood flowing: attacking those who exist at the top of their imaginary pyramid of Oppression (whether that be the bourgeoisie, the kulak, and now White people), hoping to level them downwards as a way to bring about the egalitarian Promised Land.
In all its previous incarnations, Leftist rule or Leftist uprisings have only caused social destruction and a vast expansion of group hatred.
It is the same this time.
Excellent points. Being treated fairly is not "privilege." It's what we are all owed. The job is not to deprive some group of "privileged" status but to ensure that all share equally in the rights (and duties!) of citizenship.
This is similar to my own view - that the problem is not that some are treated the way we want all to be (ie: "privileged"), but that others are not. That is, the proper focus in on the under-privileged, those who are disadvantaged, whose condition we wish to change.
So for example, if it is found that group A receives the treatment we want and expect from police, but group B is not treated very well - the path forward is to seek effective remediation for the latter, not to make the former wrong in some way.
The "privilege" narrative is more about trying to use guilt to gain power, than about working together to find good resolutions for disadvantage.
Some would say that calling some group "privileged" is not a moral judgement, just a neutral description. I think that has an element of gaslighting tho - pretending it's nominally neutral while acting as if it's wrong and immoral. I've seen how in DEI training, everybody wants to escape being labeled as "privileged", and everybody is aware that that is a bad thing to be labeled, justifying worse treatment. The unprivileged are supposed to have the moral high ground in every interaction.
I'm not sure of your generalization of all historical leftist rule, but I can certainly see it happening around me.
I’ve had the same thoughts and experiences over the past 15 years or so regarding “white privilege” and “systemic racism”. What stood out to me was the focus on the United States being a racist country. This really bothers me because I see us as unique in all the world in our attempt to create a society made up of people of all ethnicities, nationalities, cultures, races from all over the world. We’ve only been at this as a nation for 246 years. That is an incredibly short amount of time compared to other nations across the globe. Our declaration that “all men are created equal” and have the right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” stands alone as a value to be nurtured and brought to fruition. We have not achieved all that we can. Yet. Dividing us into groups that are pitted against one another does nothing to help us achieve our ultimate goal.
Thanks for this comment! You're right to point out that nothing like the USA has ever been attempted before in human history. Saying that it's inherently racist is totally inadequate as an analysis. We have improvements yet to make but we also have the means to make them, so long as we are not, as you say, "pitted against one another."
Wokeness is a massive global phenomenon and is targeting and trying to destroy the vast majority of other countries too.
This is far from an American only problem. If anything, this makes it worse.
"Dividing us into groups that are pitted against one another does nothing to help us achieve our ultimate goal."
“all men are created equal”, this is a good declaration. It is implicit in many cultures around the world.
All my years as an adult, I've been an active volunteer in my community. Not an activist, not an organizer - a volunteer. Coaching and tutoring at the Boys & Girls Club. Coaching at girls softball and Little League. Merit Badge Counselor and Cubmaster for the Boy Scouts. Coaching again at the Boys & Girls Club, even when my kids weren't playing. Volunteered alongside all kinds of folks from all walks of life: Lawyers, teachers, tradesmen, cops, firefighters, small business owners. White, black, brown, and every combination thereof. Republicans, Democrats, deline to states. You know who I didn't ever see out serving the youth of our community? Wokesters. Not a one. Too busy telling other people how to vote, I guess, to teach a kid how to field a grounder, solve a math problem, or tie a knot.
Wokeism is an almost entirely symbolic politics. They would never get their hands dirty actually teaching kids basic life skills or sportsmanship.
Dependency vs. Autonomy
And then there's the fact that few of them probably would know enough to teach those things ... ;-)
Effort and Commitment - Virtue Signaling immediate recognition - Volunteering often goes unrecognized and is a long term commitment - but we know who really cares :)
So thoughtful! thank you!
Thanks. White Brit here. Also here, the white working class is immune to CRT.
Much less stuff about CRT on our airwaves now that we're beset by a cost-of-living crisis, with food banks more popular than ever before. Could be interesting to compare the change in the popularity of the theory in the US and the UK now that there is a wider difference in economic circs.
IMO, CRT has a value as an occasional, well-chosen tool to wake up middle class professionals who have real power to make a big difference e.g. in recruitment practices. But beyond that, it becomes a laser that burns holes in people and relationships.
Very interesting to hear your UK perspective.
Why do you think the UK has 2/3rds the per capita income of the USA when adjusted for PPP or cost of living? Is it because the USA has more white privilege than the UK? That the UK performs "blackness"?
Are many Anglo Saxon ethnic English "multiracially and multi-ethnically black"?
Can you elaborate more on what you think the benefits of CRT have been in the UK?
Does CRT offer any color into why Sunni Pakistani male Britons massively socio-economically underperform Ghanaian/Nigerian/Chinese/Jewish/Indian Britons?
Do you think that the massive number of attacks in recent years, and especially in 2022, would have happened against Jews and Indians in England in the absence of CRT?
Do you think that African ancestry Britons would be murdered at 24 times the rate of ethnic english people in the absence of CRT?
Do you think the massive number of violent attacks against liberal muslims by conservative islamists (which partly explains the large number of attacks against African ancestry Britains) would have happened in the absence of CRT?
Is the failure of the Crown Service and other English police agencies to protect people in England from violence and intimidation because of CRT, wokeness, BLM; and the abolish police/prisons, defund the police narrative?
Every now and then, I would say it's good to turn our gaze to the structural foundations of racism in history, for which CRT offers some analysis. It seems to me that CRT has become problematic because it's now being directly applied on the ground, to shape person-to-person interactions in various contexts. And as the writer of the article more eloquently says, the white working class in particular (in both of our countries) ain't gonna wear that. I confess I tried to wear that jacket for a while and that's why I've ended up here, in some saner academic territory.
Michael Chambers, you under estimate the human ego and pride.
Many poor and lower middle class and middle class Americans of caucasian ancestry embrace CRT, critical theory, cultural marxism, post modern wokeness because it tickles their egos. It makes them feel "powerful" and "superior". Its like an emotional cry into the wilderness: "I still matter! My people still matter!".
The real world is a much harsher ego buster. The UK is in rapid socio-economic decline relative to the rest of the world and many parts of Asia.
The USA is doing far better than the UK, but even in the USA:
--the USA use to have over half of global GNP versus a projected 8% of global GNP a generation from now
--the vast majority of the USA's capital stock (land, intellectual property, businesses, financial assets) is expected to owned by outright foreigners within a generation
--even if we restrict ourselves only to US permanent residents, market dominant ethnics and immigrants are rapidly in the process of socio-economically dominating the USA
In the absence of wokeness, isn't it hard for lower middle class and poor anglo saxon ethnic english to process why and how foreigners, immigrants and ethnics are doing so much socio-economically better than they are? Especially when so much of the elite, upper middle class and rich are only a generation or two removed from illiteracy and poverty?
Wokeness allows poor and lower middle class ethnic english the tools to demonize successful Nigerian Britons and Ghanaian Britons as "black white supremacists". And to yell obscenities at Asians, calling them "white," or "multi-racial white supremacists."
How else would you explain how rapidly so many lower middle class Americans of caucasian ethnicity have adopted wokeness?
Thanks for the detailed post. It's hard for me to compare well the UK and US in this area. I don't see any evidence of the demonisation that you allude to at the end of your post. My impression is that wokeness is on the decline in the UK, along with our average living standards. I'll keep my eyes open for evidence of trends in this area
What other than wokeness explains the mass ethnic english complacency, apologia and refusal to take action regarding the mass murder, violent assault and rape of African ancestry Britons?
To repeat:
--African ancestry Britons are 24 times as likely to be murdered in the UK as ethnic english (many of these are liberal muslims being killed by islamists) with hardly a peep from ethnic english
--many African ancestry under age girls are raped by Pakistani sunni British males with hardly a peep from ethnic english
--by many estimates over half of all rapes of females under the age of 18 over the past generation in the UK have been at the hands of Pakistani sunni males, including vast numbers of African ancestry Britons, ethnic english, Indians, Sikhs, Bangladeshis, Chinese (Pakistani Sunni British males often rape and molest Pakistani British females too)
--there are on average over 15 violent attacks a day on liberal muslims from islamists in the UK (many of these are African ancestry liberal muslims) with hardly a peep about it from ethnic english people
--the mass attacks against Jews in the UK for many years, 2022 has been an especially horrible year for Jews in England
--the mass attacks against Indian Britons in England, near daily, often multiple times a day, since May of this year
--mass FGM (female genital mutilation) against British citizen girls
Why in your view are the ethnic english lower middle class and poor silent about all of this? Why aren't they up in arms to defend their fellow country people from violence and threats of violence?
Is the reason wokeness? Because of wokeness do they perhaps see the Nigerians, Ghanaians, Jews, Indians being attacked as "privileged", "affluent" or "multiracially white"? Do they perhaps, deep down, think that they deserve to be attacked?
Why aren't ethnic English people demanding a large increase in police and judicial spending (funded by large tax increases and massive cuts in social spending) to protect their people? Why aren't English people demanding that the police take the gloves off, and use all means necessary to protect people? Including arming the police, loosening the rules of engagement and allowing the police greater freedom to combat crime as they wish?
Why are sunni Pakistani Britons more extreme islamist than Pakistanis in Pakistan? Why are third generation Pakistani sunni Britons more extreme than the second generation sunni Pakistani Britons, which in turn are more extreme than the first generation sunni Pakistani Britons?
Isn't this the fault of the ethnic English people and their wokeness?
Why do ethnic English children do so terrible in primary and secondary schools, Standard Attainment Tests (SATs), GCSE, A-Levels if not for wokeness? Do they imagine they have a "white privilege" which they clearly and obviously don't have? Have they bought into the woke demonization of standardized tests, math and science? By doing terrible in school, aren't ethnic English setting a terrible example to other Britons and lowering their academic performance too?
Sadly the woke demonization of standardized tests, math and science is taking place all over the world. This isn't only an ethnic English problem.
When upper middle class or rich ethnic english speak of "white privilege" why don't other ethnic English tell them:
"Stop lying. You don't have any white privilege. To imply that you do, is to imply that others have less power than you do, which is racism, bigotry, prejudice of the highest order. And clearly inaccurate with respect to socio-economic outcomes. You might have physical health, beauty, mental health, intelligence, class privilege. But these clearly have nothing to do with "white" or "whiteness". Others are powerful and successful too. The rest of the world is rising fast. T"
That makes no sense. According to CRT, if you're white and poor or working class , you must be really dumb and/or lazy to be struggling in a society where everything is supposedly arranged for your benefit. I'm working class and don't know a single working class/poor white person who buys into that shit. I do know a few who are involved in activist groups dominated by college-educated ppl who will repeat CRT dogma to fit in. And successful minorities are much more likely to be seen as beneficiaries of affirmative action, diversity initiatives and discriminatory employment practices (e.g. Indian Americans hiring/promoting other Indians) than "multi-racial white supremacy," which is a concept very few working class ppl have even heard of. Not to mention that according to DEI ideology, they, being white, should benefit from these supposedly white supremacist preferences far more than Nigerian immigrants.
Sasha, I think this varies greatly by state and region inside the USA. This is not a Florida phenomenon.
In many parts of the USA, sadly, this kind of thinking has become mainstream. Is it more of a young female phenomenon?
Could this be more of a phenomenon where the majority of the elites, upper middle class and rich are not multi-generational non ethnic caucasians?
"White Privilege", "White Fragility" & "Toxic Masculinity" are unscientific concepts
Agree that "White Privilege", "White Fragility" are unscientific concepts.
While "Toxic Masculinity", is overdone by the left and woke, there is some substance to this in my view. I would call it a mental health crisis among many boys and men.
Fantastic piece Quay, my family origins are in Coatsville and South Philly, both very working class areas and I now live in Los Angeles, in a very ethnic neighborhood. I've never been more bewildered by this idea and how its permeated the spaces of elitist institutions and how damaging and dividing it is.
The more I've thought about this issue I think the term White Privilege can mean a few things. First, it can mean the benefits of "whiteness" through generations (all the things listed in that document like self reliance, punctuality, responsibility, diligence, and consistency)--and the benefits for groups of people that instill those qualities into their culture. The success is astounding for many groups, families, and individuals throughout history on doing the right things day in and day out. As you say this approach works for people of all colors.
Then there is a second part of this which is, en masse, white people don't have the "black penalty" which unfortunately many low income blacks have through no fault of their own. They are born into broken homes in very unsafe neighborhoods. They have no role models. Their schools are a joke. They are expected to behave like criminals and are met with apprehension and suspicion by police and would-be employers, neighbors, classmates, etc. They suffer from a "crabs in a bucket" reality and fail to develop or even believe in any of the worthwhile life skills noted above. White people have the privilege of not having to grow up in poor black communities.
I believe there is a penalty for being black in america. I think it is at least to some extent self inflicted. But the idea that the traits of whiteness and responsibility are somehow responsible for or any proximate cuase to that penalty is absurd. It's even more ludicrous that a policy of discouraging all people from acting responsibly would ever cure the rampant destructive behavior in the black community is seriously touted as a theory for bettering our country.
Why in your view do African Americans have a purchasing power parity (adjusted for the cost of living) higher per capita income than people in the UK?
Do you believe that UK citizens have a black penalty that is reducing their per capita income?
Or do you believe that the black penalty only applies to the 1/4th or 1/3rd poorest African Americans? And that the 3/4rs or 2/3rds most affluent African Americans do not have a "black penalty"
Why do you believe that African Americans have twice the per capita income of Somali Americans?
I don't think it's a worthwhile inquiry to compare citizens of the wealthiest nation in the world that also has 330mm population to than smaller and very different countries. It is interesting for purposes of putting things into perspective for how well we have it relative to other places. For purposes of the actual reality of "white privilege" though, it kind of a separate issue.
We disagree.
In the words of Thomas Friedman, "The world is flat."
I think it is entirely fair and legitimate to make these comparisons in a rapidly globalizing world. Especially to condescending, pretentious, patronizing, woke ethnic english toxic saviors in England who continually imply that "blacks" lack "privilege" (which de facto means power and intelligence), and who practice the hard bigotry of low expectations.
If woke ethnic english boast about all this self proclaimed "white privilege", why can't they economically outperform African Americans? Is it possible that African Americans are better than the ethnic English at many things? Maybe the woke English should send a delegation to study African American excellence, capacity, competence, entrepreneurship and success, and take back best practices to England so that the English can become more socio-economically successful?
I think this messaging increases self confidence, afro positivity while fighting afro pessimism and the hard bigotry of low expectations.
To be fair, while African Americans might have a higher mean income than England, African Americans also have more inequality and non income related challenges.
Likely a larger percentage of African Americans are billionaires, 100 millionaires, 10 millionaires, millionaires, upper middle class than people in England. However, sadly, the bottom 40% of English outperform the bottom 40% of African Americans. African Americans also suffer from far more crime victimization and health challenges and K-12 academic challenges than people in England do. :-(
More precisely the bottom 55% to 60% of British people socio-economically the bottom 55%o to 60% of African Americans. However the top 40% of African Americans economically outperform the top 40% of British people, resulting in a "slightly" higher mean income. Both in PPP (adjusted for the cost of living) and in nominal terms.
British people have a higher median (50 percentile) income than African Americans do.
I've kind of lost you here with all the macro stats but to do my best to bring it back to my initial point I would say that the "black penalty" i describe in my initial comment is what you said about disproprortionate crime, health, and K-12 issues that are in many ways self-imposed by other blacks and the surrounding community.
In poor and working class England there is an analogy here. The massive government housing estates in the industrial north of england, scotland, and ireland show a similar pattern to the US government programs that created all of the black urban despair we see today in many US cities. Throw all the poor into housing, do not require them to work (give them welfare), and then watch the violent crime explode, the family break down, and the cycle of despair to persist. Glasgow is a like a white Detroit or Chicago.
To answer a question in your original response I believe that the black penalty applies to poor black communities. It's a mom who wants her son to go to school but he has to walk through a gang infested neighborhood to do it, and then avoid fights at school. I'm not concerned with the black Harvard professor that gets pulled over and cries racism or the black high schooler in an elite school district that is desperate to feel victimized. I'm talking about good people in the worst part of Baltimore or St. Louis that are terrorized by their own community and their local "leaders" are just hustling for more government funds for their own pocket much life a third world nation run by crooks and war lords. Shame on America for not seeing this scam and helping the 95% of these communities that want the best things for themselves. Rather, we indulge the fake cries of race hustlers to assuage our white guilt and, in doing so, just perpetuate the horror.
I would choose slightly different words to describe similar concepts:
"English penalty" explains why ethnic english anglo saxons, Caribbean Britons and Gypsie Britons don't do socio-economically well compared to others, such as Nigerian and Ghanaian Britons.
"that are in many ways self-imposed by other blacks and the surrounding community." I would blame psychological warfare by the English intelligentsia and European intelligentsia for colonizing the minds of people with negativity.
"Throw all the poor into housing, do not require them to work (give them welfare), and then watch the violent crime explode, the family break down, and the cycle of despair to persist. Glasgow is a like a white Detroit or Chicago."
How horrible!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_crime_rate
Sort by per capita homicide.
I don't think the vast majority of people in the world, including in Africa, have any idea about how violent St. Louis and Baltimore are. They have war zone or higher per capita homicide rates. How can a 6th grade african american girl do well in school when she is understandably daily terrified that her brothers, sisters, mom, aunties and grandmas will be murdered, raped or assaulted? When she carries a gun to school and back every day to protect herself and her brother and her grandma. And hides her gun in the bushes near her school. [Sadly this is all too common in some parts of the USA.]
Please watch former prison psychiatrist Theodore Dalrymple discuss how crime in many parts of England have increased more than 10 fold per capita:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZyS9p-lXLM&t=1355s
He travelled through Africa on public transportation and the level of crime in many parts of England is unimaginable in most of Africa. Maybe the English can send a delegation to Africa to learn how to improve mental health and avoid widespread violence and crime?
"terrorized by their own community and their local "leaders" are just hustling for more government funds for their own pocket much life a third world nation run by crooks and war lords. Shame on America for not seeing this scam and helping the 95% of these communities that want the best things for themselves. Rather, we indulge the fake cries of race hustlers to assuage our white guilt and, in doing so, just perpetuate the horror."
Wish I could disagree with this. But it is all true.
Many of the worst performing public schools in the USA spend an insanely high amount of money per student. :-(
Sadly too many upper middle class Americans and businesses are in on the grift. They make a fortune "servicing" the supposedly marginalized, harming many in the process.
How can this be fixed?
White privilege is a Kafka Trap. It cannot therefore be discussed or debated. It’s also as obviously racist and demeaning to non-white people as it’s possible to be. Probably best ignored as an idea, which is difficult when narcissistic sociopaths are building their reputations on it.
Well written! Thank you for sharing your thoughts and history.
It is amazing to me how the Woke Religion has spread here in America. It's like fire spreading under water. I attribute it to the totalitarian nature of the belief system, and it's hierarchy. Folks get sucked in by the "science" and then it's all competition to be wokest, to ascend the hierarchy. Very similar to how communism was fetishized about 100 years ago. And add a layer of globalist power manipulating that for their own anti-human goals.
I think we're gonna be ok tho. Might be rough getting there.
Some people here showing interest in UK developments. There's an article today on the funding of scholarships to Oxford university for black people by a UK rapper, AJ Tracey- see https://www.theguardian.com/education/2022/oct/16/rapper-aj-tracey-launches-fund-to-help-black-students-at-oxford-university
"Stormzy" did something similar a couple of years ago.
However, contrast with funding for free school meals for children from poorer families (colourblind scheme) from black footballer Marcus Rashford. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-54717525
Penny/cent for your thoughts? Have a nice day
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-manchester-547175 This is beautiful!
"launch of a fund to help Black students thrive at Oxford University . . . The AJ Tracey Fund aims to address “historic underrepresentation” at Oxford, the top university in the UK. Working with St Peter’s College, Tracey, 28, hopes to attract students from underrepresented backgrounds and provide support to help them succeed, from financial assistance to mentorship opportunities."
I don't follow.
Is he trying to increase the representation of Ethnic English anglo saxon students at Oxford because they are under represented similar to how Malaysia gives preferences to the majority population via Bumiputera. [Maybe this idea deserves consideration.]
Four groups heavily over represented are Jews, Chinese, Indians and Nigerians. Does he want to reduce Oxford's over representation of these four market dominant minorities?
"when fellow rapper Stormzy announced a scholarship for Black students at Cambridge, trolls branded him racist and “anti-white”. “It’s crazy,” Tracey says, rolling his eyes. “At the end of the day, a large portion of the population is always going to have a very uneducated and misguided view on these kinds of happenings. Even if I were to say, ‘Yeah, I want to help every student, not just Black or ethnic students’, they’ll just say it’s a PR stunt."
I am even more confused. How is helping under represented groups = "racist" and "anti-white"?
"“I think, in general, for anyone who doesn’t understand why Black people who have managed to become successful want to help Black kids, it should be self-explanatory. The whole country is catered towards white people and we’re just trying to level the playing field by helping Black kids.”"
What does "black" mean?
Is he trying to reduce the representation of market dominant minorities such as Nigerians and Ghanaians and increasing the representation of under represented Caribbean Britons and Somali Britons? Where would other specific ethnicities within the superset of African Britons fit into this?
How is "under represented" connected to "marginalized"? What does "marginalized" mean in the real world?
" The whole country is catered towards white people" I am getting more and more confused. What does this mean? Don't ethnic English anglo saxons socio-economically under perform BAME in England? Is he referring to non economic issues such as cultural awareness and integration? If he wants to help marginalized and under represented people, doesn't this mean he wants to help ethnic English, maybe via a Bumiputera type system? and then maybe expanding the definition of ethnic English to include other under represented groups such as gypsies, Somali Britons and Caribbean Britons?
"we’re just trying to level the playing field by helping Black kids." Don't follow. Does he mean that Nigerians and Ghanaians would vastly socio-economically outperform everyone else in a true meritocracy versus only moderately socio-economically outperform others? If this is true, why are the English shooting themselves in the foot by not identifying, developing and retaining more Caribbean and African British talent?
"“I truly believe that I had the potential to go [to Oxford or Cambridge],” he says. “But it was just understood that if you’re from an impoverished upbringing or ethnic background it’s very hard to get in. Even if you’re intelligent, even if you know you can get those grades, it just feels out of reach. Unfortunately, the society that we live in, you know, it doesn’t favour people from a background like me. It’s not a sob story, it just is what it is.”"
I am lost. Does the UK have mass affirmative action based on race and ethnicity? Mass affirmative action based on socio-economic status? Why wouldn't Oxbridge and the Russel Group go out of their way to attract as much poor and lower middle class talent as possible?
"The other key aim of the fund will be supporting students once they are at Oxford. “Obviously, being a minority in England is one thing, but then being a minority at your place of education is quite difficult. Obviously, if they live in Oxford as well then they’re also a minority there. So just basically in every category, they’re a minority and that’s always going to be hard,” he says. Support will be awarded from the fund on a case-by-case basis, including for practical things – like train tickets or other expenses to “support the student experience of those from low-income backgrounds”.
Again, I am not understanding. Oxbridge is full of low income Jewish, Chinese, Indian and Nigerian children. Aren't they doing amazing? Aren't they dominating the affluent ethnic english students? Why would it be hard to dominate or excel in an environment as a minority? Isn't England and the world as a whole chock full of market dominant minorities that thrive as minorities?
"Working with St Peter’s, which is unusual among Oxford colleges for having had Black undergraduates since its foundation in 1929, was a natural choice. “They specifically try to get people more of a mixed background, and they’re already working on that task. So for me, it felt like a no-brainer, if the train is already up and running, to help it go,” Tracey says. “I didn’t just walk in there and think, ‘Let me just randomly sling money at a random cause, you know.” Judith Buchanan, head of the college, said she was “delighted to have AJ Tracey in our world”. “With his generous support we look forward to seeing current and future talented Black students flourish in their time here,” she said."
Interesting.
Tracey is optimistic about the impact the fund could have. “Success can be even as small as the current students saying that their time [at Oxford] was a lot easier,” Tracey says. “But who knows? I don’t mean to be one of these eternal optimists but, genuinely, one of these kids that we’re talking to right now could just be the next prime minister. If they become prime minister and make the country 100 times better and then say, ‘You know what helped me a little bit? When I was at uni, AJ Tracey’…” he trails off."
Love this!
"As well as helping individuals, Tracey sees his role as positively affecting the culture at Oxford. Discussions about the curriculum and the calls for the removal of a statue of the British imperialist Cecil Rhodes, which sparked national debate, are the types of conversation to which he might contribute. “For me it’s about gauging how the Black students feel about that. When I’ve got my foot in the door, these are all things that I can go and talk to them about,” he says. “I don’t want to be on the outside, trying to tell people what to do with the establishment. I need to be inside trying to make a difference.”"
Wouldn't anti imperialism include renouncing marxism, socialism, structuralism, post modernism, subaltern studies, orientalism, critical theory which were weaponized by the English imperialists to do immense damage to societies all over the world during the empire?
You lay bare the fallacy of Wokeism which -- ironically -- is a philosophy which does make race the most important aspect of life. The concept of race has been expanded to include and exclude people. Gays, like I am, are oppressed and hence are oppressed by the racism system. Jews, on the other hand, are oppressors since we Jews are all fabulously wealthy. Well, only we Gay Jews are "fabulously" wealthy, while other Jews are merely wealthy.
Thanks for adding some clear thinking to a subject which has gone nutzy coo-coo.
When the USA and global woke use the phrase "white privilege" or "whiteness" or "white supremacy", do they really mean non Sub-Saharan ancestry?
Are latinos, arabs and asians included as part of "whiteness"?
I *think* this is what the woke generally mean. If so, why use the phrase "white" versus non subsaharan African ancestry?
++++++++++++++++++++
MA, the UK is starting to develop four market dominant minorities:
--Jews
--Chinese
--Indians
--Nigerians (don't have the data for Ghanaians, but perhaps Ghanaians are part of this too)
All of these groups **MASSIVELY** socio-economically outperform anglo saxon ethnic english. The Nigerian diaspora is also very successful around the world, including South Africa, Canada, USA, other African countries, etc. [Would be very curious to see the data on Nigerian socio-economic success in China, Singapore, Malaysia, Hong Kong, India, UAE, Israel, Mexico, Central America, South America].
In the opinion of the global woke, is this because Nigerian Britons practice "whiteness", "white privilege", "white supremacy", "hate", "oppression", "exploitation", "hegemony", "nazism/fascism", "alt right", "patriarchy", "the man -ism", "corporations", "capitalism" etc.?
If the answer to this question is "YES", then should every poor person in the world to practice "whiteness", "white privilege", "white supremacy", "hate", "oppression", "exploitation", "hegemony", "nazism/fascism", "alt right", "patriarchy", "the man -ism", "corporations", "capitalism" etc.? Would this dramatically lower global poverty?
Judaism isn't a race or ethnicity
The CRT "take" is that we need to tease out the effect of whiteness so we all get it into our thick skulls that even the most unfortunate white person benefits from his whiteness and would be in an even worse position without it. The problems with that academic venture are well explained in the article.
Al these -isms offer some kind of academic frame of reference to view general trends in society and history and need to be held lightly - if they have any merit at all (which e.g Nazism doesn't). So I'm Ok with CRT advocates socking it to the white liberal middle classes with their theories when there is real data on discriminatory practices (e.g. in recruitment) and see what comes out in the wash.
"I'm Ok with CRT advocates socking it to the white liberal middle classes with their theories when there is real data on discriminatory practices (e.g. in recruitment) and see what comes out in the wash."
Why is CRT useful for this? What you are describing is a market failure, or stupidity, which if unaddressed, will accelerate the relative socio-economic collapse of England relative to the rest of the world.
The whole world is vigorously competing to identify, develop and retain talent and skilled labor. If England or the ethnically English people fail at this, then England and the ethnic English people will be hurt far more than anyone else.
The person or persons or groups being discriminated against will probably do just fine, or better than fine. The world is flat. The world is a meritocracy. Discriminated against people can leave England, or simply network with non ethnic English businesses and people, and have an amazing career or business that way.
The world and other groups will do fine economically if ethnic English people want to be poor and unsuccessful.
There are situations where people are not given interviews because of their foreign name or e.g. obviously Muslim cultural background, or pretty white girls are disproportionately recruited by middle aged males. (I have seen that in action - until HR stepped in) In such cases, the world is not always a meritocracy. Equality laws have a role there, as well as awareness training for recruiters and I would expect awareness of structural racism to play some role in that kind of training.
These would be market failures. Businesses and people who behave like this will be competed away in the free markets. And replaced the other businesses and people who are more meritocratic.
Trust in freedom. Trust in free markets. Trust in people.
Perhaps what you are referring to is what economists call information asymmetry. If talent is not being identified, developed and retained . . . lets improve the process. Or else we will be replaced by people with better access to information.
In the USA Indian American muslims are **EXTREMELY** socio-economically successful. In the entire USA only Jews and nonmuslim Indians socio-economically compare with them.
Is the same true in England?
I think we should get rid of many existing equality and protected classes laws. And most supposedly marginalized people will do better than people expect.
If we look within muslims, shia make more than sunnis. And within shia, sixers (ishmaelis) make more than twelvers. And among the sixer Ishmaeli, the Bohra do particularly well. Being a type of global Jewry in terms of success, creativity and open mindedness.
Given the massive differences in socio-economic success between different groups of muslims, maybe "muslim names" is not as big of an obstacle as many think.
Having said this, there is an issue if people conflate liberal successful cultured muslims with very conservative islamist Pakistani Sunni Britons. or with very conservative islamist sunni Somali Britons. (Many Pakistanis and Somalis are not very conservative sunni islamists.)
Are you referring to obstacles for lower middle income employment and businesses, which are different from more affluent, globalized and cosmopolitan parts of society?
"or pretty white girls are disproportionately recruited by middle aged males." This is 100% true. There is a lot of economic literature about the socio-economic value of "beauty privilege". To the degree possible economists prefer data sets that have a quantitative estimate of "beauty". Males also have this privilege, albeit to a smaller degree.
I am not sure what can be done about this. But cultural marxism, critical theory, CRT, wokeness are terrible ways of studying, understanding and reacting to this phenomenon.
How would you make the world more meritocratic?
I think globalization is making the world more meritocratic. If the English people choose to be less meritocratic than other peoples, then this will accelerate the drop in the percentage of global income and wealth accruing to the English people. Ergo, the English people need to figure out how to improve the meritocracy right quick.
Or else disaster is coming.
Thomas Sowell has views mirroring yours, I think. As far as I know, Pakistani-origin Brits are fast catching up with white Brits in terms of educational attainment. Bangladeshi-origin Brits are still behind. But I haven't checked.
I can agree that if markets cure problems organically and gradually, then it's better to leave them to do just that, but I don't think that they always do. Look at the roots of the 2008 economic crisis, which were extreme lack of regulation.
I think there are barriers to many private sector professional jobs for Muslims in particular because they are feared, and usually don't drink or hobnob with white British clients in the customary manner. I don't think the markets have cured that. Any hiring manager worth his or her salt should be ready to examine their own personal prejudices and the cultural practices of their organisations and adapt them to be as litigation-proof as possible. In that context, a dose of CRT shock therapy may work wonders.
I am a bit of a data freak:
https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/education-skills-and-training/11-to-16-years-old/gcse-results-attainment-8-for-children-aged-14-to-16-key-stage-4/latest#by-ethnicity-and-gender
https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/education-skills-and-training/11-to-16-years-old/gcse-results-attainment-8-for-children-aged-14-to-16-key-stage-4/latest#by-ethnicity-and-eligibility-for-free-school-meals
Bangladeshis considerably outperform Pakistani and ethnic English academically.
The country of Bangladesh use to be much poorer than the country of Pakistan 1971 to 1974. Pakistanis killed perhaps 3 million and raped millions of Bangladeshis in a genocide in 1971; destroying the Bangladeshi economy. Perhaps 1.5 million Bangladeshis starved to death in 1974. Today Bangladesh significantly economically outperforms Pakistan, and the Bangladeshi economy grows much faster than the Pakistani economy; resulting in a rapidly increasing ratio of [ (per capita Bangladesh income) / (per capita Pakistani income) ].
There are large differences in performance between different Pakistani subgroups with shia doing better than sunni. Shia almost certainly are also far less likely to rape or molest someone or go to prison or be islamist extremist. Although I don't know how to look up the precise data on this.
"Look at the roots of the 2008 economic crisis, which were extreme lack of regulation." Long conversation needed on this. We probably either need a single global financial regulator or very complex models of correlations and interconnections with high transparency and extremely close coordination between different global regulators. In many ways the world increasingly has a single global financial system.
"I think there are barriers to many private sector professional jobs for Muslims in particular because they are feared, and usually don't drink or hobnob with white British clients in the customary manner." Trying to say this delicately. This is far more a problem for the English people, than for muslims. Muslims have plenty of academic, business and career opportunities outside of Briton. And if muslims exercise those options, muslims will do just fine. The English people will not.
Are you implying that it is easier for muslims to have successful businesses, careers and social lives in Hong Kong, China, Malaysia, Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea, Thailand, India, Indonesia, Canada, Dubai, USA, Germany, Netherland, Switzerland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Estonia, Luxembourg, Belgium, Ireland, Sweden, Slovenia, Czech Republic, Lithuania, Malta, Latvia, Poland than in England?
One of the problems leading to negative stereotypes against muslims inside the UK is the way the UK woke and UK hard left backs islamists against liberal muslims. Liberal muslims in the UK are too scared to openly speak. And this creates the perception that islamists are a larger percentage of the UK muslim population than they actually are. This, along with shariah courts and schools in England based on very conservative fiqhs (there are also liberal muslim fiqh shariahs with the UK chooses not to implement) leads to the brainwashing of British muslim children with islamism. The longer a muslim family stays in the UK the more islamist or conservative (islamist is a subset within the superset of conservative) they become on average.
This is why UK muslims are more conservative and islamist tilting than muslims in many other countries, including many muslim majority countries.
The English people need to look in the mirror and examine themselves. Why did tens of thousands of their fellow British citizens travel to many foreign countries to join Daesh and AQ based networks?
Sadly the flattening and negation of muslim diversity in favor of very conservative sameness, has created negative stereotypes and problems for muslims inside the UK.
If the UK wants to address this challenge, back liberal muslims. Sharply increase police funding and protect liberal muslims inside the UK. Encourage liberal muslims to speak publicly. Encourage dialogue with islamists. Arrest, convict and incarcerate many tens of thousands of British nationals for honor violence, FGM, violence and intimidation against liberal British muslims. Make it clear that no honor violence, FGM or other violence or threats against liberal UK muslims will be tolerated, full stop. (Using English idiom.)
Whatever the cost, whatever the blowback, however many scores or hundreds of UK police officers die in the cause of freedom, the UK will fight until every liberal UK muslim is safe.
To quote Churchill: "we shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end, we shall fight . . . on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this Island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God’s good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old."
Don't the CRT people also argue that successful Nigerian and Ghanaian Britons are "white", benefit from "white privilege" and perhaps practice "white supremacy"?
Briahna Joy Gray when she was a practicing lawyer in greater LA and NYC use to frequently be called "white" by her ethnically caucasian collogues as an insult. She had continued to be dogged by these accusations in her political career. Including as Bernie's campaign manager.
The people accusing BJG of being white" and practicing "whiteness" are never or almost never of African ancestry.
It is common for children of caucasian ethnicity in the USA to accuse African american children who do well in K-12 of "acting white", being "white" or performing "whiteness."
Is this common in England too?
I suspect similar views are held by CRT activists here but I've never heard of them coming from children or being bandied around the workplace. Sounds awful. Sorry to hear about it, in fact. If that's widespread, it sounds like CRT has done a lot more damage in the USA than here.
Glad it isn't as bad in England.
When asked why Nigerian Britons are economically and socio-economically much more successful than other Britons, what do critical theory woke post modern SJWs say?
Do they go on an attack vector against Nigerian Britons?
When asked why African ancestry Britons are 24 times as likely to be murdered as ethnic English, critical theory woke post modern SJWs say? Don't have the exact numbers, but the ratio is similar or even higher when holding academic performance and income constant. [Since African ancestry Britons academically outperform ethnic English and earn about the same amount of money. Maybe slightly more. However, if Nigerians and Ghanaians are taken out of the sample, African ancestry Britons under perform ethnic English.]
When asked why there are so many violent attacks against liberal muslims by islamists in the UK, what do critical theory woke post modern SJWs say? Why don't the English police and broader English society protect "THEIR" liberal muslims? Liberal muslim British are as British as any other Briton. And share a common heart, soul, culture and family?
When asked why in 2022 there have been so many violent attacks against Jews and Indians, what do critical theory woke post modern SJWs say?
Would it be fair to say that the extreme violence against African ancestry Britons, liberal muslims, and to a lesser degree Jews and Indians is partly because the UK police has pulled back since Michael Brown in 2014?
On your last para, you may be right. It's so hard to assess. The national inquiry that found "institutional racism" in the Met must have had an impact on policing practices too.
As we both know, parcelling out the impact of racism on multifactorial disadvantages across societal groups is notoriously difficult, which of course suits CRT followers. But even if evidence against the impact of racism was statistically compelling, I guess most would not change their beliefs.
It seems easier to me to show a number of individual instances of a similar kind of racism, where analysis is easier, like in the recruitment scenarios I've mentioned, and then tentatively extrapolate that there must be a structural force at play. That might be the best level of statistical certainty reached on some issues, but still worthy of consideration.
It's clear that the colonial project makes little distinction for colour. Assimilation through debt bondage applies to all, and if you cannot access the finance then you simply can't assimilate.
I was hired by IBM in 1978. It took 3 interviews. At the last interview one of the field managers came up to me acting kind of nervous and I'm thinking, "What's the matter now?"
He says to me, "You know you'll have to shave off your beard!"
I just shrugged my shoulders and said, "Money is more important than hair." He was all smiles after that. I got the job as a Customer Engineer.
So I was flown to Atlanta for 10 weeks of training. I had been an audio tech trouble shooting to the transistor level so it was like a 2 month vacation. I got a 12% raise when I came back for being near the top of the class.
That is when I met Bob. He had been off with a back problem when I was interviewed and after coming back from sick leave while I was in Atlanta he had a Full Beard. Mine had been like Malcolm X. Bob was an old IBMer, pushing 60 and white of course. I didn't say anything and let six months go by.
I got 2 weeks off and grew my beard back. The result was hilarious. Bob had been constantly getting jokes about his beard. Mine was invisible. Nobody said nuthin. Except Bob.
The shaving thing is a constant in Japan actually. You will rarely find a guy working with a beard. However, this also sounds a bit like seniority. Was Bob the only other bearded person?
Yes, I don't really know what the story behind it was. Maybe he just decided that he was old enough and didn't give a shit. He was probably pushing 60 which I thought was OLD. LOL
And then you get closer to that and you're like...it's not that old. I'm in my 30s now and I used to think that this was old lol
So what did YOU think of 9/11? If that is not too personal a question.
https://psikeyhackr.livejournal.com/