Diane Abbott - Was it a racist comment? Should she go?

[citizenzen]

Whilst an idiotic comment I don't see how "white people" are harmed by her comments.

I'm not sure why you require some tangible form of harm for a statement to reconsidered racist.

Abbot's statement was racist. Ironically, she helped to disprove it, as she is black and her remark was divisive.

 

[Hubert Cumberdale]

Far more worrying was her comment that white nurses from Scandinavia shouldn't work in her constituency because they had "never seen a black person before".

Deeply worrying from the shadow health minister.

 

[Hubert Cumberdale]

They're really not offensive to anyone but the most hypersensitive who have nothing better to do then to search for things to be righteously outraged at.

I would agree if this was someone on the street. Or an actor. Or a sports person.

But this is a member of the shadow cabinet.

If Labour win the next election we will have an unrepentant racist in charge of the NHS.

What's to worry about?

 

[Darat]

Far more worrying was her comment that white nurses from Scandinavia shouldn't work in her constituency because they had "never seen a black person before".

Deeply worrying from the shadow health minister.

I missed that one - any links to it?

 

[The Don]

I missed that one - any links to it?

Only secondary source:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/1999/mar/16/lucyward.guardianprofiles

A frequent denouncer of racial discrimination, she stood accused of it when she complained in 1996 that the 'blonde, blue-eyed Finnish girls' in her local hospital in east London were unsuitable as nurses because they had 'never met a black person before'.

 

[Hubert Cumberdale]

Also

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/MP+Diane+in+`race'+rant+at+white+nurses.-a061282571

 

[Darat]

Thanks.

 

[andyandy]

The defence of that statement by Bernie Grant (former Tottenham MP) was even more remarkable:

She is quite right,” he said. “Bringing someone here from Finland who has never seen a black person before and expecting them to have some empathy with black people is nonsense. Scandinavian people don’t know black people – they probably don’t know how to take their temperature.

Interestingly I was checking the Daily Wail to look at the reader comments - all the big green ticks are very much of the "this is racist" "she needs to resign" ilk.....which is a little surprising because when Starkey made his (much more inflammatory IMO) comments the big green ticks were all going to "can't say what you think anymore" "PC Correctness Gone Mad" "He's being punished for telling the truth" etc etc.

so either you're getting a completely different readership commenting on those different pieces, or the Wail commentariat are at once frothing about a black woman making a racist comment, and ambivalent and supportive of a white man making a racist comment.....

they're a funny old crowd

 

[Darat]

...snip...

so either you're getting a completely different readership commenting on those different pieces, or the Wail commentariat are at once frothing about a black woman making a racist comment, and ambivalent and supportive of a white man making a racist comment.....

they're a funny old crowd

You expect consistency from the Daily Mail's readership? Wow..... I've a bridge for sale if you are interested?

 

[joolz]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16423278

I think it was a racist comment, especially because I've heard her use the word "white" in describing people when using the word "black" would have drawn criticism (her description of Tweedledum and Tweedledee for one).

Should she go? Tougher one, but given she came out with the seemingly-on-speed-dial-lie of all politicians caught saying something naughty i.e. the criticisms come from taking it out of context I'd say she should go.

I do think it was a racist comment and she should admit it, think about her words and do some self-analysis on why she feels that way and whether it is justified. People often expose themselves in unguarded throw-away lines like that, but she's a politician so it doesn't surprise me that she has double standards.

I wasn't offended by what she said, but I felt sad that someone at thet level of government really feels that way in the 21st century. I also have concerns that there will be racist white people who use it as an excuse to harden their own attitude, which is bad for the country. For those reasons she should leave the cabinet. For a party that shows its contempt for the nation by bringing Mandelson back again and again I don't think it will do her political career any long term harm.

I liked her feisty attitude when she first came into politics, but haven't had much respect for her since I saw the way she played up to Portillo on The Politics Show. It's one thing to be civilised and polite to your opposition, even to share a joke, but it's another to be flirtatious and nauseating, even if they knew each other at school. I get the impression she is either insecure or sexist as well as she didn't seem to relate to Portillo on a peer-to-peer level as is her right, but as a 'weaker' woman to 'stronger' man and that got right up my nose because I detest his politics.

 

[Captain Obvious]

While we're on the subject, I'd be interested to find out from Ms Abbot who she considers to be black:

• Someone who is 100% black by lineage
• Someone who is 50% or more black by lineage
• 30%
• 15%
• Anyone who looks "black"
• Anyone who self-identifies as black

• Anyone running in the street with a big bag of Tesco Value rice.

 

[joolz]

<snip>
However, I hate these sloppy apologies:

Yeah, yeah, I'm like so sorry for like whatever!

I don’t think her apology is sloppy, the whole thing is a very subtle and deliberately worded statement to absolve herself of any responsibility for the offence. It’s so subtle that I wouldn’t have noticed unless I’d been looking for it…..

The ‘apology’:

"I understand people have interpreted my comments as making generalisations about white people. I do not believe in doing that. I apologise for any offence caused."​

The tone of the apology is patronising. I saw something recently (in Private Eye? Paul Merton?) about the way that spin is sneakily starting put the blame on the public for any offence a politician causes, and Abbott is doing it now too.

Instead of saying 'I did something wrong' and apologising, they now imply, as Abbot does here, that the offence is caused by the interpretation of her comments, not the comments per se, and as 'the people have interpreted….’ we become the instigators of the resultant offence. Abbott apologises for the offence subsequently, but only after implying it’s our fault.

So, Brits, we only have ourselves to blame - if we hadn't taken offence then there wouldn't have been any offence

Some people may consider this an irrelevant play on words, but after I heard about it I noticed the next couple of govt apologies, and now this one, were the same. We are being spun. Greasy devils those politicians!

 

[Gazpacho]

Only secondary source:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/1999/mar/16/lucyward.guardianprofiles

That's identifying specific individuals though. And it is a problem if a nurse charged with caring for black people has to work through phobias at the same time.

Anyone running in the street with a big bag of Tesco Value rice.

Class-y.

I can't help but recall the hostility faced by US Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders, who was fired for reasons that, 16 years later, seem difficult to explain to someone who wasn't around.

 

[Hubert Cumberdale]

That's identifying specific individuals though. And it is a problem if a nurse charged with caring for black people has to work through phobias at the same time.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

So if Andrews Lansey said that Nigerian nurses with black curly hair and thick lips shouldnt be allowed to be nurses in Tunbridge Wells because they hadnt seen or touched a white person before, then this would be fine with you?

 

[Gazpacho]

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

So if Andrews Lansey said that Nigerian nurses with black curly hair and thick lips shouldnt be allowed to be nurses in Tunbridge Wells because they hadnt seen or touched a white person before, then this would be fine with you?

Show me a white person who has been offended by being called blonde and blue-eyed.

 

[Hubert Cumberdale]

Show me a white person who has been offended by being called blonde and blue-eyed.

ME.

Ok.

Yours truly.

I'm offended by being called blonde and blue-eyed because I am neither of those things and I object to the racist generalisation.


Care to answer my question by the way?

 

[Soapy Sam]

I think arguably saying "Whites oppressed Indians" is a reasonable historical perspective, not unlike saying "Whites enslaved blacks", even though the reality is probably a bit more complex and I'd expect to be called on both of them to be honest.

However, saying "White Americans are instituting racist policies" I'd consider racist yes, because it's ascribing behaviour to a group based on skin colour. If they said "The American Government is instituting racist policies" then no, because it's ascribing behaviour to a group based on it being a group.

Can a statement be both demonstrably true and still "racist"?


As regards Ms. Abbott, I think I prefer politicians who say what they think to those who merely spout the PC party line. That way , we know who to vote out at the next election.
Which could be both lots,of course.

 

[Noztradamus]

Show me a white person who has been offended by being called blonde and blue-eyed.

That's not what's being discussed.

 

[Gazpacho]

I'm offended by being called blonde and blue-eyed because I am neither of those things and I object to the racist generalisation.

That's not relevant to the situation. Show me a blonde-haired blue-eyed white person who is offended by being called blonde and blue-eyed.

And don't accuse me of moving goalposts just because you're forgetful of context.

Care to answer my question by the way?

Nope.

 

[Hubert Cumberdale]

That's not relevant to the situation. Show me a blonde-haired blue-eyed white person who is offended by being called blonde and blue-eyed.

And don't accuse me of moving goalposts just because you're forgetful of context.


Nope.

Oh dear of dear.

What about those Scandinavians who have brown hair and green or brown eyes?

Or does your racial stereotyping preclude the existence of such a creature?

Again, care to answer my question?