AdrianHart.net

Posted: April 2013

Anti-racists take note: there is NOT a “culture of racism” at Varndean School.

I’m often challenged to explain why I insist the spectre of racism in UK schools is a “myth”. It happened recently. “Adrian … research has shown there are more than 30,000 recorded incidents per year”, said my challenger.   I pointed out that it was actually my research that had shown this but seeing these incidents as ‘racism’ is a bit of a stretch. I pointed out that most of this stuff is name-calling and emanates from primary schools keen to demonstrate their zero tolerance, ‘nip it in the bud’ approach. My challenger had assumed it to be mostly a secondary school phenomenon. But he had a trick up his sleeve: “So what about that secondary school in Brighton? You live in Brighton! It’s the school where black children are regularly attacked and racially abused by gangs of white children. It was in the Institute of Race Relations monthly newsletter. It was on the European ‘Hate Crime’ news archive (produced by the I-CARE, the Internet Centre for Anti-Racism Europe). Didn’t you hear about it?”.

Ah, Varndean School. I had heard about the ‘racism’ saga from numerous parents who have kids at Varndean. But they hadn’t heard about it from their children. They read about it in the local newspaper. “BRIGHTON SCHOOLGIRL HOUNDED BY RACIST BULLIES” ran the headline (see Brighton Argus Wednesday July 4^{th 2012)}). And from Argus-online, to the IRR, to I-CARE it propagates across the web.

Posted: January 2013

When it comes to the social reality of race and racism, 2012 can look like a good year for British society … or a very bad year.  But if we insist that rose and race-tinted spectacles be handed in at the door – which was it?

So how are things in multi-racial Britain? If you were to review 2012 you might agree with me in saying that, thanks to the Olympics, it was the year an exciting, fizzing superdiversity became more prominent than ever. The ‘mixed-race’ ingredient causing things to bubble has been dubbed the ‘Jessica Ennis generation’. Everywhere you looked Britain seemed distinctly less white; a melting pot of ethnicity where even the meaning and relevance of the term ‘race’ is melting away too.

Or you might, like race-equality think-tank The Runnymede Trust, see this as something of an illusion.

Posted: December 2012

The schools ‘role model’ centred campaign Show Racism the Red Card now seeks funding directly from fines imposed on errant players. But the absurdities of its enterprise run much deeper.

On one level you could be forgiven for assuming anti-racism charities Kick it Out (KIO) and Show Racism the Red Card (SRTRC) are booming operations right now.

SRTRC’s mission to “deliver” anti-racist training to teachers and pupils across the country must surely get a boost from the racism in football saga? The recent incidents, runs the SRTRC mantra, are merely the ‘tip of the iceberg’ when it comes to the endemic racism hiding away in British society? And for KIO, which aims to “eliminate racism” within football itself, the Suarez, Terry and other incidents surely offer fresh evidence that the campaign is as relevant as ever and “there is still a long way to go”.

But there’s trouble in anti-racism paradise.

Posted: Nov 2012

This discussion took place on Eddie Nestors BBC Radio London Drivetime show, on Nov 08 2012.   You can listen to it here.

Inspired by a news story concerning a 13 year old Millwall fan banned for verbally abusing Bolton forward Marvin Sordell, the discussion here was more broadly about racism and children. 'Kick it Out' Chair Lord Herman Ouseley takes the view that while children shouldn't be labelled "racists" their racist abuse is, nontheless, "unacceptable", a "part of life" and stems from the influence of parents at home.  I counter this view by insisting on a distinction between racial etiquette and consciously held beliefs; "Children need the freedom to work things out by themselves. All we do by elevating these issues into "racist incidents" is racialise their interactions with each other ... it just makes things worse".

The interesting thing about the discussion is that for Lord Ouseley the "it" in Kick it Out is a conception of racism reduced down to the elimination of "inappropriate" language.   He seemed to agree that labelling children behaving childishly as 'racist' was a nonsense but still saw them as naive transmitters of the racism that's "a part of life" ... (in other words 'its the parents'). The schools campaign Show Racism the Red Card take a similar view, describing their educational programme as "breaking the transmission of inter-generational racism".

So we're back at the 'nip it in the bud' school of vulgar child development theory!  Its nice and simple tho - take the stuff kids say, re-interpret it as racist (being careful not to imply the little lambs are themselves "racists") and then outlaw it while at the same time inculcating the correct anti-racist values.  Thankfully, as this site elaborates, kids dont work that way.  But the attempt to enforce correct values damages and cramps childhhood.

It was hard, in 2 minutes, to stand up for the freedom to be a kid (unfettered peer interaction), stand up for adult moral authority (i.e. telling them to cut it out when they're being nasty little beggers right in front of you) and respectfully point out that none of this amounts to racism.