Everything the race commission report got wrong

Confusion and outrage greeted the British governmentReport from the Commission on Racial and Ethnic Differences. While opponents grapple with some of the more alarming findings, such as the claim that there is little evidence of institutional racism in the UK, criticism and questions about the validity of its claims have spread widely on social media.

What is the report on racism in the UK doing wrong and is something wrong?

The main arguments

From start to finish, the Race Commission attaches great importance to the “freedom of choice” of people from racial and ethnic minority groups and explains racial inequalities based on the choice of certain groups or in favor of other social factors such as class.

Despite the Results of other reportsThis suggests that hate crimes are not getting worse, but that perceptions of an increase have been influenced by internet trolling. It is claimed that the term “BAME” should be abandoned as it obscures certain problems between different groups. and that structural racism in work, education and elsewhere is difficult to prove.

This finding on structural racism contradicts earlier findings such as that of 1999 Macpherson investigation report in the murder of Stephen Lawrence and other recent ones Evidence of that needs to be addressed appropriately.

Perhaps the most obvious problem is the report’s confidence in what the government appears to be tactics have been busy time and again : With Black and Asian representatives minimize the credibility of racism in its many forms.

The commission was handpicked by Munira Mirza, the director of Policy Unit number 10, was agreed dismiss institutional racism as “perception more than reality”.

The chairman of the commission, Tony Sewellhas previously dismissed the existence of systemic racism. Co-author Samir Shah has expressed has similar views, and so Mercy Muroki. Another member, Dambisa Moyo, is In favor of End foreign aid to Africa because it creates a culture of dependency. And Kemi Badenoch, the Minister for Equality, to whom the Commission reports directly, has done so too previously denied the existence of systemic racism. It is therefore not surprising that institutional racism was rejected when the Commission’s findings were assessed.

A selective view

Having certain racial and ethnic groups get richer in the UK over the past few decades and the Commission is right to point this out. Calls to prioritize social class are also important. While the report appears to support an approach that examines how class, race, gender, and other social identities intersect, it does not consider how race intersects with gender, sexuality, and disability.

It is noticeable that white underperformers in education are highlighted throughout the report. However, it does not take into account what happens afterwards in relation to Employment and wealth (long-term results tend to be better for example for white graduates).

The fact that white minorities struggle against the outcomes of ethnic minorities also reflects arguments often touted by the far right. Think Tank for Racial Equality, the Runnymede Trust, describes this than play “in cultural readings of inequality, what pitch [white people’s] Interests directly against the ethnic minorities and at the same time enable medium-sized commentators to hold the “lower class” responsible for their own misfortunes.

The report focuses on comparing the health, education, criminal justice and employment of different groups using a data-driven approach. However, we claim that this is ideologically motivated. For example during high COVID-19 levels among racial and ethnic groups are recognized that Roots of inequality should reside in socio-economic factors such as living in high population density and disadvantaged areas and working in higher risk occupations.

While undeniable, the report also emphasizes that disproportionate levels of COVID-19 are not due to systemic racism, and overlooks the fact that race and ethnicity are the cause Jobs and living Some groups can get in the first place.

There are several other shortcomings. There is hardly any mention of the Racization of Religion in Islamophobia;; a mention of the ” Glass roof ”; nothing about white dominance in the upper levels of society;; and no attempt to critically examine or obliterate the legacy of the British Empire, for example this Names of national honors. Rather, the report vaguely refers to the “inflows and outflows” that link the British Empire to the Commonwealth of Nations, as well as a controversial reference to the impact of the “slave era” on “remodeled Africa / Britain”.

Activist Patrick Vernon said the report Efforts to belittle slavery, colonization and the injustices that result from them for millions of people as “the equivalent of a Holocaust denier being asked to develop a strategy against anti-Semitism. Half of the members of the commission do not understand the history of the UK, the implications and effects of enslavement or today’s racism. ”

Police language

The report clears the language used to understand how races work, e.g. B. Recommendations to stop using the term “White Privilege” and to replace it with “affinity bias” because it “alienates” white people who do not accept that they are “privileged by their skin color”.

It supports a divide-and-rule approach that spreads tensions within and between groups, such as suggestions that “minorities long established in a country … in a context of racial and socio-economic disadvantage” be withheld because of a Lack of optimism about social mobility and education, while “immigration optimism” from groups new to the UK means they are less exposed to prejudice.

In response, Dr. Halima Begum, Director of the Runnymede Trust, has said It seems that for ethnic minorities, “if we succeed, it is up to us. If we fail, it is up to us. The state has no collective due diligence on our results if they are disproportionate.”

The timing of the report’s publication could not be more opportune given the widespread allegations of racism within the British kings and the establishment as a whole. Such rumblings threaten, with some, the international reputation of Brexit Britain, particularly in the Commonwealth of Nations Review of their continuing membership.

All of this just a few days before Boris Johnson makes his trip to India Cement alliances in the east. Given the widespread criticism, the bottom line is that the Commission’s report as a whole is not credible, despite getting a handful of things right.

Raminder Kaur, Professor of Anthropology and Cultural Studies, University of Sussex and Gill Margaret Hague, Professor Emerita for Violence Against Women Studies, Bristol University

This article is republished by The conversation under a Creative Commons license. read this original article.


Leave a Comment