Trevor Phillips Suspended From Labour Over Islamaphobic Allegations.

[Dante]

They aren't a human construct in their entirety, unless you don't believe in genetics at all? Or are you saying that there is no such thing as race but that there is ethnicity?

Black people is an interesting example, because the diversity of genetics amongst black people is huge. In that sense I agree that all black don't necessarily belong to the same race, as there are multiple black races (ethnicities). However you can be racist towards all of those black ethnicities (races). If you are saying that there is no difference between people at all based on their genetics, that is wrong and we can tell its wrong by using our eyes.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/04/race-genetics-science-africa/

There’s No Scientific Basis for Race—It's a Made-Up Label
It's been used to define and separate people for millennia. But the concept of race is not grounded in genetics.

Any biological anthropologist will tell the same.

 

[Fiskey]

Yeah you are right. Maybe my original post was a little to broad in the language. It is definitely important to understand the differences. I guess I meant more of even if we take the argument that it’s not “racist” it’s still discriminatory so not much help. It is a bit like saying irish immigrants in America didn’t suffer from racism because irish is not a race-well ok, but they were still discriminated against and that too is/was a problem. Though as you say, a different problem to racism itself perhaps.

The example you give is I think why its important to draw the distinction. Are people being discriminated against because people dislike their culture, or is it because they have a different skin colour? Of course it can sometimes be both.

I think there is value in drawing this distinction, as we will try to solve the underlying issues in different ways depending on what the problem is.

 

[Fiskey]

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/04/race-genetics-science-africa/

Any biological anthropologist will tell the same.

Have you actually read the article? All it says it that racial categories conceived in the 1800s are false, which no one is arguing against. A direct quote:

“That race is a human construction doesn’t mean that we don’t fall into different groups or there’s no variation,” Foeman says. “But if we made racial categories up, maybe we can make new categories that function better.”

If you don't like the word race and prefer "group" that's fine, but it is a purely semantic argument.

 

[Smores]

There's only one reason people want to draw the distinction, they agree with one discrimination and not the other so you don't want it labelled the same. Especially not racism as it's important we all pretend that doesn't exist in Brexit Britain.

 

[Synco]

Have you actually read the article? All it says it that racial categories conceived in the 1800s are false, which no one is arguing against. A direct quote:

“That race is a human construction doesn’t mean that we don’t fall into different groups or there’s no variation,” Foeman says. “But if we made racial categories up, maybe we can make new categories that function better.”

If you don't like the word race and prefer "group" that's fine, but it is a purely semantic argument.

What defines a "racial group" in your eyes? Can you give examples of "races" with a short characterization of what you see as the crucial features?

 

[Fiskey]

There's only one reason people want to draw the distinction, they agree with one discrimination and not the other so you don't want it labelled the same. Especially not racism as it's important we all pretend that doesn't exist in Brexit Britain.

I can envisage a situation where a white British catholic priest hates that we have gay pride marches over the country and finds he fact he is surrounded by gay people in his home in Soho where he has lived for 150 years disturbing.

Would we call this person racist? No, for sure he's bigoted but he's not a racist, he doesn't like the culture he is confronted with everyday. We would also try and educate this person in a different way to that in which we would educate a racist.

 

[Fiskey]

What defines a "racial group" in your eyes? Can you give examples of "races" with a short characterization of what you see as the crucial features?

I would define a racial group purely on the basis of genetics.

 

[VeevaVee]

All those condemning Labour as unelectable, are we really gonna pretend the Conservatives aren’t full of racist old white men and women? It’s funny how much focus is on Labour in instances like this but not on what the actual Prime Minister has said

 

[Dante]

Have you actually read the article? All it says it that racial categories conceived in the 1800s are false, which no one is arguing against. A direct quote:

“That race is a human construction doesn’t mean that we don’t fall into different groups or there’s no variation,” Foeman says. “But if we made racial categories up, maybe we can make new categories that function better.”

If you don't like the word race and prefer "group" that's fine, but it is a purely semantic argument.

Yes. You clearly haven't since you've just skipped to the final paragraph.

 

[Dante]

I would define a racial group purely on the basis of genetics.

Which genetic markers are you looking at? Because there are none that are unique to black people that don't also exist in white people.

 

[Fiskey]

Yes. You clearly haven't since you've just skipped to the final paragraph.

I read it when it was published (I'm a national geographic subscriber) and refreshed myself now. I don't understand how you could have read it and come to the conclusion that race doesn't exist.

 

[Fiskey]

Which genetic markers are you looking at? Because there are none that are unique to black people that don't also exist in white people.

Exactly, black people aren't a catch-all race. As I posted above (before you quoted the article) there is a huge amount of genetic diversity within what we would call "black people". There is no single race of black persons, but there are many black races.

 

[Dante]

Exactly, black people aren't a catch-all race. As I posted above (before you quoted the article) there is a huge amount of genetic diversity within what we would call "black people". There is no single race of black persons, but there are many black races.

Pick one of the black races then.

Which genetic marker is unique to them that doesn't exist in other races?

 

[Synco]

Dante is quicker every time, but I pretty much have the same questions.

 

[EwanI Ted]

All those condemning Labour as unelectable, are we really gonna pretend the Conservatives aren’t full of racist old white men and women? It’s funny how much focus is on Labour in instances like this but not on what the actual Prime Minister has said

Labour prides itself on being the most important anti-racism movement in the country, which is why its more damaging to be called racist and why Labour people are more focussed on it. Sadly the sort of casual old fashioned racism you get in the Tory Party is sort of priced in at this point.

 

[Fiskey]

Pick one of the black races then.

Which genetic marker is unique to them that doesn't exist in other races?

Dante is quicker every time, but I pretty much have the same questions.

I don't understand the point of the question? Are you saying that people aren't genetically different? Or that families aren't genetically more similar to each other than the general population? Or that groups of people who have been isolated together over time end up with traceable genetic lineages? Because all of that is well understood and has been for a long time.

Or is the question whether it matters? Because of course it doesn't matter, and that's why people fight racism. Humans are incredibly similar, much more so than lots of other animals.

 

[Dante]

I don't understand the point of the question? Are you saying that people aren't genetically different? Or that families aren't genetically more similar to each other than the general population? Or that groups of people who have been isolated together over time end up with traceable genetic lineages? Because all of that is well understood and has been for a long time.

Or is the question whether it matters? Because of course it doesn't matter, and that's why people fight racism. Humans are incredibly similar, much more so than lots of other animals.

There is no genetic basis for race. That's the point.

 

[VeevaVee]

Labour prides itself on being the most important anti-racism movement in the country, which is why its more damaging to be called racist and why Labour people are more focussed on it. Sadly the sort of casual old fashioned racism you get in the Tory Party is sort of priced in at this point.

I think you're right on the general point, but does Labour pride itself on that? I'd say a lot its voters do, but I don't think racist individuals in the party will stop most of them voting for Labour.

 

[Dobba]

He's a professional racist and proud of it.

 

[Fiskey]

There is no genetic basis for race. That's the point.

Why do certain people get sickle cell anaemia when it is absent in other populations?

 

[Sassy Colin]

I agree. As a community we're rubbish with priorities. 99% of our households will pay for sky, I suspect not even 9% of them would swap that for a membership to fund something like AIPAC for Muslims.

Ask people to donate for a mosque - no problem, ask them to fund scholarships for media; no chance.

I just don't see how these things equate with each other, or exclude one at the expense of the other. The 2 examples you provide have no baring on each other.

 

[Dante]

Why do certain people get sickle cell anaemia when it is absent in other populations?

Some people.

There are people of every race that get sickle cell anaemia. And sometimes their brothers/sisters don't.

Do you believe that sickle cell anaemia is a reliable marker for a particular race?

 

[Synco]

I don't understand the point of the question? Are you saying that people aren't genetically different? Or that families aren't genetically more similar to each other than the general population? Or that groups of people who have been isolated together over time end up with traceable genetic lineages? Because all of that is well understood and has been for a long time.

Of course humans differ genetically, that's a banality. But the question was if you can give concrete examples for what you'd call a race, and the genetic features that define them. If I'm not missing anything, you have avoided a direct answer to that question so far, and that reinforces my impression that the answer isn't as clear for you as you say.

If you are saying that there is no difference between people at all based on their genetics, that is wrong and we can tell its wrong by using our eyes.

Would you say "white" Europeans with brown hair and brown eyes are a different race than those with blonde hair and blue eyes? If not, what is the difference between these phenotypical features and those you see as definitive for constituting a race?

 

[Sassy Colin]

I think you're right on the general point, but does Labour pride itself on that? I'd say a lot its voters do, but I don't think racist individuals in the party will stop most of them voting for Labour.

Not this again! Your average working class Labour voter wants the immigrants out and supports Brexit. The Labour leadership might like to think so (although the antisemitism row and now Islamophobia seems to contradict that), but it is not the case amongst the traditional Labour voter, it simply isn't.

 

[Fiskey]

Of course humans differ genetically, that's a banality. But the question was if you can give concrete examples for what you'd call a race, and the genetic features that define them. If I'm not missing anything, you have avoided a direct answer to that question so far, and that reinforces my impression that the answer isn't as clear for you as you say.


Would you say "white" Europeans with brown hair and brown eyes are a different race than those with blonde hair and blue eyes? If not, what is the difference between these phenotypical features and those you see as definitive for constituting a race?

This is what I was getting at when I was asking what's the point, and I'm glad you agree its a banality, as I wasn't sure.

I'm not the one deciding when a family ends and a race begins, and I'm not interested in doing so. I think it is important that some people do in fact explore this, as we see medicines that work for some groups of people and not others.

If we get back to the Jewish point, I was saying that they are a race (or group, or ethnicity) whereas Muslim people are not and have not really ever been. I'm not trying to draw an exact distinction between where one begins and one ends, but if you study both religions and the people who have followed them I think that this is a similarly banal point.

 

[VeevaVee]

Not this again! Your average working class Labour voter wants the immigrants out and supports Brexit. The Labour leadership might like to think so (although the antisemitism row and now Islamophobia seems to contradict that), but it is not the case amongst the traditional Labour voter, it simply isn't.

Yeah, I think you've got the wrong idea about Labour voters in this day and age. There's many many Liberal or Liberal leaning 18-40 year olds who definitely aren't wanting immigrants out and Brexit. A massive amount of the immigrants out lot and working class Brexiters moved over to the Tories, for obvious (-ly dumb) reasons (Boris is their racist saviour, Farage and Tommy also backed him, Brexit etc.), hence the huge margin.

 

[Arruda]

I am not aware of any biological consensus regarding race as it pertains to humans. It is a social thing, not?

 

[Sassy Colin]

Yeah, I think you've got the wrong idea about Labour voters in this day and age. There's many many Liberal or Liberal leaning 18-40 year olds who definitely aren't wanting immigrants out and Brexit. A massive amount of the immigrants out lot and working class Brexiters moved over to the Tories, for obvious (-ly dumb) reasons (Boris is their racist saviour, Farage and Tommy also backed him, Brexit etc.), hence the huge margin.

Same could be said for voters either left or right of centre, but these are not traditional working class Labour voters. I also suggest that that age group could be extended up to retirement age in the case of both left and right of centre voters.

 

[Synco]

I'm not the one deciding when a family ends and a race begins, and I'm not interested in doing so.

If we get back to the Jewish point, I was saying that they are a race (or group, or ethnicity) whereas Muslim people are not and have not really ever been.

I think these two statements fundamentally contradict each other.

I'm not trying to draw an exact distinction between where one begins and one ends, but if you study both religions and the people who have followed them I think that this is a similarly banal point.

I don't think the concept of "races" makes any sense without (pretty) exact distinctions. More than that, it mainly seems to me like a means to claim the existence of exact distinctions where there are none.

It's a bit fruitless, tbh. There were a couple of pretty precise questions asked about this exact point - the distinction between definitive and non-definitive genetic & phenotypical features for assuming races -, and so far you have found a way of not answering them.

 

[Zlatattack]

I just don't see how these things equate with each other, or exclude one at the expense of the other. The 2 examples you provide have no baring on each other.

Ok, let me clear this up a little.

The Muslim community in the UK is largely under-represented in the public sphere. We don't have that many media professionals, we don't have many political representatives who share our faith (and are willing to take a stand on "Muslim issues"), we don't have a central religious figure or authority. There are lots of reasons for this;

• A lot of our community is working class or lower middle class, so not in positions of influence or rubbing shoulders with those who are.
• Many of us who go into higher education tend to focus on practical degree courses, not stuff like media, arts etc.
• There isn't a large "Muslim" vote bank. We're a diverse community, we have different political needs across the community, we're very rarely a majority within a constituency so the idea of a "Muslim vote" doesn't really exist.
• Islam as a religion is diverse. On paper the authority figure is the Caliph, but we don’t have one. Even when we did, for a lot of Islamic history they’ve either been Emperors or ceremonial in role. Since the fall of the Ottomans there isn’t a central Islamic authority figure, so there isn’t an international body to champion issues faced by the international Muslim community (whatever they may be)

Now most Muslims feel that we need more representation, and post 911 with the regular abuse we’ve been getting by politicians and media alike, many feel we (UK Muslims) need a body that will work to lobby our interests in parliament and also to challenge the media and it’s misrepresentation. In my opinion this is what AIPAC does for in part for the Jewish community (although they do tend to focus on Israeli interests).



Unfortunately, our so-called community leaders don’t really champion this (mainly because they have no unity, little vision and are all interested in being head honcho of their own little kingdoms, even if it’s limited to a twitter following). I also find our community generally doesn’t put its money where their mouth is, unless it’s something proven/traditional, ie something they understand without having to research it.

Sky TV is a luxury, especially in a community where there is limited disposable income. I reckon most of our people would not give this little luxury (or smoking, or whatever) to fund an organisation, I feel is a necessity. Mosques were another example. We generally don’t utilise our mosques very well, we have a lot of buildings, but they don’t really return much value for the community. People are happy to fund new mosques, but not always happy to fund value added activities in mosques.

What’s a value-added activity in a mosque? Well loads of stuff. Currently most of them are used as prayer halls, and teaching areas for basic principles of Islam. Some extend to provide funeral services, or host occasional Islamic lectures or events for adults too. That’s great, but in my community, we have a problem with kids on the streets. Could we use some of the space as a youth club? Could we use some of the space for social use for mums, maybe a nursery? Maybe we could use some of the carpark for five a side pitches considering it’s empty apart from on Fridays. Perhaps the classrooms could be used for GCSE booster classes or revision sessions? Maybe the mosque could hire tutors to help kids with homework, rather than parents paying for tuition elsewhere? How can we use the space to help people with addictions? Maybe provide support for those with mental health issues?

All these things could be done at my local mosque, but people don’t like to fund them. The same people would happily fund another large empty prayer hall, used Friday lunch times and then by a handful of people the rest of the week.

TLDR; I think UK Muslims need to put their hands in their pockets and fund an organisation to lobby politicans and to tackle the rabid media. I think we spend our disposable income and charitable donations unwisely. I respect peoples right to make those unwise decisions.

 

[Fiskey]

I think these two statements fundamentally contradict each other.


I don't think the concept of "races" makes any sense without (pretty) exact distinctions. More than that, it mainly seems to me like a means to claim the existence of exact distinctions where there are none.

It's a bit fruitless, tbh. There were a couple of pretty precise questions asked about this exact point - the distinction between definitive and non-definitive genetic & phenotypical features for assuming races -, and so far you have found a way of not answering them.

That's like saying because you can't say exactly at which point Philip Green becomes a rich person (is it £1m is it £100m?) then you can't have an opinion on whether rich people should pay tax. It's conflating discussions.

 

[Synco]

That's like saying because you can't say exactly at which point Philip Green becomes a rich person (is it £1m is it £100m?) then you can't have an opinion on whether rich people should pay tax. It's conflating discussions.

No idea what you want to say there, and I've tried for a few minutes. What are the discussions I'm conflating?

 

[Fiskey]

No idea what you want to say there, and I've tried for a few minutes. What are the discussions I'm conflating?

We both agreed that genetic differences exist, and that those differences are heritable. Therefore there must be a point when a family, becomes a tribe, becomes a race/ethnicity/distinct genetic group, as long as there isn't significant breeding with external groups.

The Jewish race have been fairly exclusively breeding and distinct for at least 3,000 years so I can say that they are clearly a race, just as you can say that someone with wealth of £100m is clearly rich.

I don't have to prove at what point they became a race, or what features they have that distinguish them as a race, I just have to know the history and the commonly understood meaning of the word. You've been asking me to prove at what point a group becomes a race, which I don't need to do for the purposes of this discussion. It would be similar to asking me at what point Philip Green became rich.

 

[Synco]

We both agreed that genetic differences exist, and that those differences are heritable. Therefore there must be a point when a family, becomes a tribe, becomes a race/ethnicity/distinct genetic group, as long as there isn't significant breeding with external groups.

There's no logically compulsive connection between the statements in the first and second sentence. That argument - why human genetic variety works in a way that justifies the category "race" - is the argument you still have to make. Which you are avoiding since it was first asked for.

The Jewish race have been fairly exclusively breeding and distinct for at least 3,000 years so I can say that they are clearly a race, just as you can say that someone with wealth of £100m is clearly rich.

Yet Yemenite Jews, Ethiopian Jews and Canadian Jews look very different from each other on average, despite your earlier claim that "race" can be seen with the naked eye. How come?

And, although being far from an expert in Jewish history, I'm also sure that Jews - at least in Western countries - have intermarried quite a lot with non-Jews.

I don't have to prove at what point they became a race, or what features they have that distinguish them as a race, I just have to know the history and the commonly understood meaning of the word. You've been asking me to prove at what point a group becomes a race, which I don't need to do for the purposes of this discussion. It would be similar to asking me at what point Philip Green became rich.

When you claim the existence of races, you have to give criteria for what constitutes a race. It's as simple as that.

 

[Zlatattack]

I kind of wish i hadn't gone with the anti semitism example, it's taken us down a rabbit hole where Islamaphobia has been completely ignored, much like Trevor Phillips wishes it would be.

When talking about "racism" against Muslims, the type of people who argue "Muslims aren't a race" are the same sort of people who'd argue;

• trans people should check downstairs to see which toilet to use
• "what was she wearing?", when a woman talks about sexual abuse
• "they're the ones stabbing each other" when black people talk about stop and search

Hatred, discriminatory behaviour or prejudice against Muslims because of their religious beliefs might not be the textbook definition of racism, but it's impact is exactly the same.

• The looks of visible contempt i get on the streets from some passers by.
• The verbal/physical abuse Muslim women get on the streets.
• The limitations people place on themselves because of a sense of fear.
• The regular physical and verbal abuse faced by Taxi drivers in our community.

I'm a big bloke, I was born and raised in the hood, i'm not afraid of confrontation. Yet I fear for my family. My wife doesn't apply for jobs in certain areas because as a visibly Muslim woman, she doesn't think she'd be welcome. She'll happily go shopping at the local Intu centre, but won't walk down the high street to the Primark because it's quieter there, less people and often drunks hanging around. Plenty of Muslim women have faced abuse from those people there.

Shop assistants in some shops will try to ignore me - i often have to call out for help louder in a much firmer manner before i get someones attention. Often it's a lot of subtle things, some clearly less subtle.

Call it whatever the f**k you want - it is what it is.

 

[Inigo Montoya]

I kind of wish i hadn't gone with the anti semitism example, it's taken us down a rabbit hole where Islamaphobia has been completely ignored, much like Trevor Phillips wishes it would be.

When talking about "racism" against Muslims, the type of people who argue "Muslims aren't a race" are the same sort of people who'd argue;

• trans people should check downstairs to see which toilet to use
• "what was she wearing?", when a woman talks about sexual abuse
• "they're the ones stabbing each other" when black people talk about stop and search

Hatred, discriminatory behaviour or prejudice against Muslims because of their religious beliefs might not be the textbook definition of racism, but it's impact is exactly the same.

• The looks of visible contempt i get on the streets from some passers by.
• The verbal/physical abuse Muslim women get on the streets.
• The limitations people place on themselves because of a sense of fear.
• The regular physical and verbal abuse faced by Taxi drivers in our community.

I'm a big bloke, I was born and raised in the hood, i'm not afraid of confrontation. Yet I fear for my family. My wife doesn't apply for jobs in certain areas because as a visibly Muslim woman, she doesn't think she'd be welcome. She'll happily go shopping at the local Intu centre, but won't walk down the high street to the Primark because it's quieter there, less people and often drunks hanging around. Plenty of Muslim women have faced abuse from those people there.

Shop assistants in some shops will try to ignore me - i often have to call out for help louder in a much firmer manner before i get someones attention. Often it's a lot of subtle things, some clearly less subtle.

Call it whatever the f**k you want - it is what it is.

Where on earth do you live?

 

[Sky1981]

The example you give is I think why its important to draw the distinction. Are people being discriminated against because people dislike their culture, or is it because they have a different skin colour? Of course it can sometimes be both.

I think there is value in drawing this distinction, as we will try to solve the underlying issues in different ways depending on what the problem is.

I dont think people simply hates one color of skin out of the blue. It always comes from a certain stereotyping that often represents said colors of the skin. So its culture before

Does he feels the same hatred or phobic when talking to a budhist arabs? Or a white muslims?

For me both is still wrong. Ideally you dont hate people without a proper reason. But it probably tells you where your problem lies

 

[Inigo Montoya]

I dont think people simply hates one color of skin out of the blue. It always comes from a certain stereotyping that often represents said colors of the skin. So its culture before

Does he feels the same hatred or phobic when talking to a budhist arabs? Or a white muslims?

For me both is still wrong. Ideally you dont hate people without a proper reason. But it probably tells you where your problem lies

That's interesting and simplistic at the same time.

I was abused recently at a garage for what reason I'll never know. A young girl in a car full of white passengers( one was her mum) just stopped in front of me and said!" fecking paki!" It was intended to demean and hurt.

 

[Zlatattack]

Where on earth do you live?

I live in Derby in the UK. It's not a bad place actually, but this kind of stuff does happen. It's not every day but from my immediate circle of friends/family;

- I've defintely got those looks (always from women too)
- I've been ignored by shop staff when asking for assitance until i've spoken in a loud, assertive manner (if i talked to you like that you'd probably consider it rude)
- My sisters have had drunk people swear at them on the high street
- My brother in law has faced "racist" abuse in his taxi
- my friend (and another one of my sisters) have been racially abused in their pharmacy

Each one of these people would have a load of similar stories they could tell you. It's our communities day to day now. I don't know what label fits this, but i know what it feels like. This is all in the last 4-5 years too.

Previous to this the only racist incidents i recall is someone shouting bin laden at my dad and me in 2001 when we were on a walk. Dad was a taxi driver for 35 years, in his younger days him and his mates would beat up passengers who had too much to say, in his old age he just put up with the shit. Drink plays a big part of it, it gives the racists the courage to say who they are and what they really think.

 

[RedSky]

I was abused recently at a garage for what reason I'll never know.

Some people are fecking pricks. They won't ever stop because they have no concept of decency and it gets transferred from one generation to the next sadly (with a few exceptions).