Our public bodies are institutionally racist: against white people
Cultivating solidarity in a multi-ethnic democracy is not easy. In fact, as much of history can attest, it is a very hard thing to achieve.
And it becomes especially difficult when state-funded institutions demonise the largest ethnic group in the country.
This is exactly what the London Museum has done: the publicly funded body has urged its staff to address the problem of 'whiteness' as part of a so-called diversity initiative.
This is because 'whiteness' is supposedly 'embedded' in the workplaces up and down the country and it needs to be rooted out. In the Orwellian world in which so many institutions now operate, where words mean the opposite of how we commonly understand them, challenging 'whiteness' is an example of 'inclusion'.
In fact it is about the most divisive thing that can be done: it makes the task of fostering a more cohesive society doomed to fail. Contrary to what the woke activists claim, white British people are amongst the most tolerant indigenous populations on Earth, not the bastions of racism they are made out to be.
Yet time after time, our public institutions peddle a fundamentally warped interpretation of British history and heritage in which to be white is to be tainted with all kinds of sins, from colonialism to white supremacy.
Britain had made magnificent strides in terms of race relations before the emergence of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement. But the poison of modern identity politics risks undermining all of this.
Much of the 'anti-racist' activity in modern Britain is inspired by the 'radical progressivism' that has taken root across the pond in the United States.
We are told that the prejudices and biases of the white-British population are to be unlearned and corrected. But ethnic minorities, by contrast, are deserving of nothing less than infinite compassion and understanding. This is patronising towards black and Asian people; it also makes a mockery of the principles of personal responsibility and fairness.
The woke capture of public bodies risks fuelling a white backlash against the establishment. Equality under the law and colour-blindness are being denigrated by those who claim to advocate for 'anti-racism'.
Take, for example, the Sentencing Council for England and Wales – which has recommended that a pre-sentencing report (PSR) should normally be considered necessary if an offender belongs to certain groups. These include being 'from an ethnic minority, cultural minority, and/or faith minority community'.
This carries a variety of risks – including the possibility that religious beliefs and cultural norms will be used as a defence by ethnic-minority offenders in the hope of securing more lenient sentences.
Our public institutions should foster belonging. While the likes of the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and Prudential Regulation Authority (PRU) have rowed back on their plans to 'improve' diversity and inclusion for its regulated firms, the guidance on 'whiteness' provided by the London Museum to its employees shows that 'wokeness', in the shape of racial identity politics, is anything but dead.
And our money is paying for this: just let that sink in. The effort of the last half-century at building a successful multicultural and multiethnic nation is being vigorously undermined. This should gravely concern all of us.
Dr Rakib Ehsan is the author of Beyond Grievance.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Diane Abbott is pushing the Left's biggest myth about immigration
The Labour Left were always bound to loathe Sir Keir Starmer's recent speech about the downsides of mass immigration. All the same, one of their objections to it strikes me as somewhat peculiar. At a rally on Saturday, the veteran Labour MP Diane Abbott thundered that Sir Keir's speech was 'nonsense' – because, as she stoutly reminded her audience, 'immigrants built this land'. Stirring stuff. I can see only one small problem. It's not strictly true, is it? Clearly Ms Abbott disagrees. Indeed, she proudly declared that her own parents 'helped to build this country'. As she herself acknowledged, though, they only arrived here from Jamaica in the 1950s. What precisely does Ms Abbott think Britain looked like, before her parents' ship pulled in? A barren, primitive, uncivilised wilderness, whose humble natives dwelt in bushes and subsisted on nettles and raw shrew? Did her parents look around, sigh, and then patiently set about erecting St Paul's Cathedral and Blenheim Palace? I'm not convinced that they did. In fact, I'm reasonably sure that most of this country was built a fair bit earlier, largely by people who were born in it. This is because, until quite recently, only a very small percentage of the population was born abroad. Between 1951 and 2001, the average annual net immigration figure was 7,800. In 2023, by contrast, it was 906,000. It doesn't take a mathematician of Ms Abbott's stature to recognise that this is quite a sharp increase. Still, I don't mean to pick on her. She's far from alone. In recent years, any number of Left-wing politicians and pundits have taken to pushing the line that 'immigrants built Britain'. On last week's edition of the BBC's Question Time, for example, the retired trade union leader Mark Serwotka informed viewers that Britain is only 'the great country it is because of centuries of immigration'. From the Left's point of view, I suppose I can see this tactic's advantages. Any time a voter dares suggest that net immigration of almost a million a year is a touch on the high side, and possibly not entirely sustainable in the longer term, shut them up by telling them that a) it's always been like this, and b) they should be grateful. The risk, though, is that some voters might feel a tiny bit insulted. Because the claim that 'immigrants built Britain' implies that the natives were so ignorant, lazy and useless, they achieved nothing until their superiors arrived from abroad to lift them out of savagery. Come to think of it, I'm reasonably sure that the Left used to have a word for that type of attitude. It was 'colonialism'. 'Way of the World' is a twice-weekly satirical look at the headlines while aiming to mock the absurdities of the modern world. It is published at 6am every Tuesday and Saturday Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Hong Kong leader says national security scrutiny of restaurants is necessary
HONG KONG (Reuters) -Hong Kong will toughen screening of catering premises for potential violations of national security, which civil servants should accord top priority in deciding on licence approvals, the city's leader said on Tuesday. Critics see the move as targeting the territory's many businesses, including cafes and restaurants, that have displayed posters, symbols or images expressing solidarity with its embattled pro-democracy movement. Such businesses, widely called the "yellow economic circle", have faced growing pressure from authorities, such as tax inspectors, at a time when they are reeling from a broader economic and retail downturn. "Food and environmental hygiene officers ... should place national security as the most important consideration and make appropriate assessments," John Lee told reporters. He called the move "appropriate and necessary", saying all civil servants were expected to rate security as the highest priority under the national security law. The city's food and hygiene department would follow the law in considering new licences and renewing existing ones, he added. In recent years, authorities in the Asian financial hub have made use of sweeping national security laws imposed after mass anti-government protests in 2019 to systematically crack down on many of its liberal pockets. In May, the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department sent letters to thousands of food and entertainment premises, obliging them to accept new terms related to national security. In one document seen by Reuters, the government told business owners to ensure no activity in which they were engaged or involved in "may constitute or cause the occurrence of an offence endangering national security". The former British colony's crackdown on dissent, from arresting democratic activists to shuttering liberal media and civil society groups, has drawn criticism from countries such as Australia, Britain, Canada and the United States.
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
No more ‘peace dividend'
One consequence of spending more on benefits is that there is less to spend elsewhere, notably on defence. The so-called 'peace dividend' that Western governments splurged after the end of the Cold War has left us vulnerable to a resurgence of precisely the sort of international tensions we are seeing now. Money that in the past would have bolstered armed forces now goes on social programmes that political leaders are unprepared to unwind because so many voters are dependent on them. Mark Rutte, the Nato secretary general, was in London for talks with Sir Keir Starmer yesterday as part of a tour of capitals designed to get member states to commit to spending much more on defence. In a speech at the Chatham House think-tank, he called for a 'quantum leap' in collective security just to maintain deterrence. 'Our militaries need thousands more armoured vehicles and tanks, millions more artillery shells, and we must double our enabling capabilities, such as logistics, supply, transportation and medical support,' he said. At the weekend, Russia deployed an estimated 500 missiles and drones in attacks on Ukraine, partly in response to Kyiv's extraordinary coup in destroying Russian bombers based in Siberia last week. The huge amounts of ordnance involved are indicative of the scale of modern warfare. Mr Rutte wants Nato members to commit about 5 per cent of national wealth to defence, though without saying by when. Yet Sir Keir could only reaffirm his Government's ambition to increase spending to 2.5 per cent of GDP, rising to 3 per cent in the next parliament if circumstances allow. But they will do so only if he can get to grips with spending in other areas. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.