‘Academic’ says Brits are racist to the core

Not for the first time lately, the subversive BBC was involved in an incident of race-baiting as academic Kehinde Andrews was invited along to fulminate over how deeply racism is ingrained in British society and, by extension, the minds of the British people.

Racism is so deeply ingrained that it is part of the DNA of the nation”, opined Andrews. Which translates into: “it’s your fault, you’re all to blame”.

For the likes of Andrews, the British carry a unique guilt for historical wrongdoings – by British, he means white people of course, let’s not kid ourselves, he’s not blaming Asians.

All positive events in British history are seen as a mere aberration, with anyone extolling these positives met by accusations of being a triumphant, fascistic racist – all negative events are to be amplified.

Furthermore, the accusation is extended to the modern day. Apparently, there is still some kind of conspiracy against people of colour. According to Andrews, the U.K is effectively a white supremacist society. Despite “hate-crime” figures suggesting only sporadic and isolated incidents, committed by very few people. And that the recent “spike” in these incidents was exaggerated for political purposes.

Yet this narrative can be easily dismissed in the face of affirmative action programmes which promote people of colour into all areas of public life. One only must look at the ratios attending higher education. The drive for diversity is ubiquitous. Additionally, the democracy in this white majority country has produced a situation where white people will soon become a minority in many of their own cities, including its capital. How could a people be any more welcoming than one who deliberately sets about marginalising itself in its own country?

For Andrews it’s not enough, nothing ever will be. History will always be a stick to beat us with. And he uses this stick recklessly to make incendiary claims that if police officers were armed, they’d be running around killing black people.

Imagine everyone took up the tactic of blaming entire groups for the crimes of a minority within it.

How does he think the black community would fare when the police force he demonises reveals that blacks are by far more likely to be involved in gun crime than any other ethnic group?

Andrews says the UK is “no different” to the US in relation to its black community. Then it must stand to reason the we have the same inequalities. The same inequalities in crime statistics, perhaps? If we are to continue with Andrews’ tactics of collective guilt, perhaps we could get him to explain why blacks are killing fellow blacks at astonishing and catastrophic rate in the U.S?

Perhaps intra-black urban warfare isn’t to be discussed by white people.

Fair enough. Can he explain why blacks are killing whites at such a disproportionate and disconcerting rate? Or why blacks are disproportionately killing police officers? Or why they are disproportionately involved in more violent crime across the board?

Why is there such a prevalence of gangsterism and glorification of violence in “black culture”, where women are generally described as bitches and hoes? How long are we to act like this is normal behaviour and pass it off as art, fit for influencing youth? Am I to conclude that gangsterism is “ingrained in the DNA” of black people? Can I say that there is a “toxic current” which flows through black society? If Blacks had more guns in the UK would they be using them to kill white people?

Should I “take a knee” at a celebration of black culture?

Surely not.

Children armed with guns in gangs. Progressive?

Perhaps the law is ignoring white criminals to keep the numbers down. For example, statistics on gang-rape aren’t collated by race on a national basis, (one would have to trawl through individual forces, not many collate by race either) –  perhaps Kehinde think this is to protect the white community from the reality of crime figures? The act of a white supremacist society covering up their crimes? Perhaps we should have a national index of these figures to find out – in the name of truth and reconciliation through collective guilt.

Yet the historical guilt aspect is the most teasing. If we are uniquely bad and racist, then it stands to reason that others/everybody is better than us. That must be testable? Again, if we play by his rules of collective guilt, he might have some explaining to do. Perhaps he may enlighten us as to which group of people would he’d choose as his champion of historical morality? Could he tell us if his ancestors were living in freedom and liberty before the whites arrived?

Of course, slavery is used as a key piece of evidence in the case to paint Britain as a racist society. But does it bother him that his fellow black men were selling each other amongst themselves and to foreigners, including Chinese and Arabs/Muslims, for centuries before the Europeans turned up? Does it bother him that Africans are still selling Africans? Is slavery only a problem when whites do it to non-whites? Is there to be truth and reconciliation for the Barbary slave trade, where pirates originating from Africa stole people from Britain for slavery?

white slaves
Apologetic whites demonstrate their will for reparations against the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade, which was ended by the British Empire.

And while he focuses on the bad parts, does he pay no credence to the fact the British people went out of their way to compel the government to end the slave trade? And that the government subsequently went about trying to end the practice, certainly within it’s on sphere of influence?

If all these questions are open for an honest discussion, including Andrew’s, then we will have the possibility of truth and reconciliation. If, however they are to be discussed to collectively demonise a specific group, then that will only create entrenchment to the point where eventually that group will react.

It is a sure sign of a mature society that Andrew’s can say these things in public, it is one the many privileges the academic enjoys living here, other societies wouldn’t be so tolerant of his wanton denigration of their national character. I’m pretty positive a white supremacist society would be the least likely to tolerate this.

Yet, mud sticks. And if nobody is challenging his narrative it’ll become accepted fact. Accepted guilt.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s