Rupa Huq suspended

Originally Posted by nomadking

The key thing is that she came out and said this sort of things, while there are masses of others in the Labour party who think them, or discuss them amongst themselves.

And your evidence for this assertion is?

[daveeb]

Originally Posted by nomadking

Whatever way you look at it, she referred to his race and in a derogatory way.

Badly worded and unacceptable by her. I assume you were equally unimpressed by Boris Johnsons infamous "piccanninnies with watermelon smiles" contribution some years ago.

[Julian]

Whataboutery alert

[daveeb]

Originally Posted by Julian

Whataboutery alert

No, it's a cross party problem that's all.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Paul

Ok .... but how is calling a black man "black", racist and vile

“Superficially”. I.e not really. I.e. “Uncle Tom”

If you’re a conservative black person, you can’t possibly be properly black.

It’s like Larry Elder a republican black man that ran for governor of California. Headline…..: Larry Elder the Black Face of White Supremacy

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...face-of-white/

If you’re black and disagree with the left you’re not black enough, like wise if you’re a woman standing for women only spaces you’re a transphobic or if you’re a gay person campaigning for same sex attracted rights ……..also a transphobic.

The left will come for you, even if you are of the left.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by daveeb

Badly worded and unacceptable by her. I assume you were equally unimpressed by Boris Johnsons infamous "piccanninnies with watermelon smiles" contribution some years ago.

Not strictly true, of course. It was 2 separate quotes, not one.
The "watermelon smiles" was a reference to the fake smiles that tribal leaders in the Congo would have for an upcoming Royal visit. The tribal leaders were responsible for a lot of killing. He was evoking an image, nothing more.

[GrimUpNorth]

The very least they should do is suspend her and following an enquiry kick her out if found guilty.

[Julian]

Originally Posted by daveeb

No, it's a cross party problem that's all.

Thank you for confirming what I said

Originally Posted by Paul

Ok .... but how is calling a black man "black", racist and vile

She called him ‘superficially black’ because his social background doesn’t conform to the left’s acceptable definition of blackness, which is economically and socially marginalised and from a certain strata of the working class.

In one phrase she managed to be obnoxiously both classist and racist. It’s actually quite an achievement. It is, as I said, also unsurprising to anyone who knows the well these people drink from, which is every bit as bigoted and narrow minded as those they claim to oppose.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by daveeb

No, it's a cross party problem that's all.

Exactly.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by GrimUpNorth

The very least they should do is suspend her and following an enquiry kick her out if found guilty.

Agreed. This could have been a gift to Truss were it not for her economic mismanagement drowning it out.

Originally Posted by daveeb

No, it's a cross party problem that's all.

Racism is a societal problem, not a political one. Calling it ‘cross party’ diminishes it.

The particular *flavour* of racism exhibited by Huq is a problem of the hard left*, which is obsessed with theories of race and class that stereotype people and lead to ridiculous incidents like this one.

*Not the Labour Party, but represented both inside and outside it in wider society

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Chris

Racism is a societal problem, not a political one. Calling it ‘cross party’ diminishes it.

The particular *flavour* of racism exhibited by Huq is a problem of the hard left, which is obsessed with theories of race and class that stereotype people and lead to ridiculous incidents like this one.

It’s can hardly be considered a flavour of racism if it’s not discriminating against him on the basis of his race. Trying to claim he’s a black person without the lived experience of black people is indeed monumentally stupid but not racist.

Originally Posted by jfman

It’s can hardly be considered a flavour of racism if it’s not discriminating against him on the basis of his race. Trying to claim he’s a black person without the lived experience of black people is indeed monumentally stupid but not racist.

She attacked him on the basis of his race. She wasn’t simply drawing attention to the difference between his lived experience and the majority of black Britons. She was actively attempting to diminish him for it - on the basis of his race. That’s racism, except of course from the point of view of the hard left, which believes it owns the issue and, in some cases, even believes that it is not possible for anyone from an ethnic minority to be racist.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Chris

She attacked him on the basis of his race. She wasn’t simply drawing attention to the difference between his lived experience and the majority of black Britons. She was actively attempting to diminish him for it - on the basis of his race. That’s racism, except of course from the point of view of the hard left, which believes it owns the issue and, in some cases, even believes that it is not possible for anyone from an ethnic minority to be racist.

I think this can only be a deliberately sensationalist interpretation of events to slur people you are politically opposed to. Hence your persistent use of “hard left”.