web analytics


By ATWadmin On January 19th, 2007

Yip – the faux row over alleged racist comments on Big Brother continues!

Last night, I watched panelists on the Northern Ireland version of Question Time (“Let’s Talk”) being asked about this topic and they all agreed that the remarks made by Jade Goody and her coven on the Channel 4 programme were racist. There was also a general consensus that “we” are a racist society and that “something must be done” to “fight” this innate racism.

I say this is garbage. We are NOT a racist society, though our tolerances have been stretched to the limit by the invasion of illegal immigration that Labour has presided over. Britain’s are, by and large, VERY tolerant of other races, and the self-loathing liberals who are keen to beat up on themselves sure as hell do not speak for me.

Then there is the question of what racism actually is. Why, please tell, have the media ignored comments made by Big Brother housemate Jermaine Jackson that other occupants were “white trash”? Isn’t that equally as horrible as anything said about Ms Sheety? How can it be that the MSM ignored that aspect of this event?

The truth is that it is NOT racism we witness in Big Brother. It is gross stupidity and ignorance. If people don’t like it, turn the thing off. Those freaks and egotists who choose to go onto such a programme really don’t warrant our attention in this way were it not for the liberal media’s determination to “prove” just how bad and vile British society has become.

62 Responses to “WHAT IS RACISM?”

  1. The antics of Goody and co are not a refletion of society, because they were deliberately selected for the show becasue they were notorious for being thick, ignorant morons. Three halfwits in an artificial enviroment are clearly less representitive of society than the millions of people who have sided with Shilpa Shetty over the coven.

    The debate over whether the unpleasant behaviour is racist or not indicates the strange elevation of racism as the ultimate sin. If it could be demonstrated that the bullying was not motivated by race would it be any less disgusting?

    The CBB story has made the front page of the New York Times now-
    Which does suggest that it is being over egged somewhat.

  2. Racism has three main characteristics:
    1. It is whatever the left define it as being, so is subject to whim
    2. it is an ‘offence’ committed solely by whites
    3. it is never an ‘offence’ committed against whites.
    And that’s it.

  3. I believe Jade is of mixed race herself being a quadroon(1/4 negro) or octroon(1/8 negro) does that still make her a racist (or only the white part of her genetic make-up),

    She may be a bully and a bit of an ass-hole, but racist – I don’t think so.

  4. The producers of the show have got what they wanted:- the oxygen of publicity.

  5. "Racism has three main characteristics:"

    Allan@Aberdeen should really know better because he is a racist himself:

    "I’m relatively relaxed about Iranians as compared with Pakistanis and Arabs. They should be repatriated and soon.
    Friday, December 29, 2006 at 09:44PM | Unregistered CommenterAllan@Aberdeen "

  6. It has more to do with vulgarity and ignorance and something akin to class envy that out and out racism. It is the fear of anything different, better or challenging.

    A real old school movie star with elegance, charm, manners, education, and abilty is too much for the vulgar

  7. is repatrionionism the same as racism ?

    plus he’s wrong, if you think the Arabs are emotional wait till you see the effing Iranians……

    I think the defining racist dynamic here is not the coven but the reaction, the Indians are showing race solidarity and race based preference in the dispute, and forming a race defined pressure movement, the reason the anti white (and undeniably racist) comments of Jackson don’t get the same response is because whites are not race conscious and don’t see it as a personal insult, if this is healthy or not im not sure… this (on the part of the Indians) is more than natural and lets face it if it was some wee Irish girl getting treated like that our eyes would be popping into our buckey bottles. the race dynamic could also be a nation / religion dynamic, is just a question of how that group defines themselves, in Indian you can have all three, hence the big passions.

    its not that they hate the treatment , its just that they wont stand for a prized "one of theirs" getting it, if jade were the victim it wouldn’t get past the gossip sections.

  8. ‘There was also a general consensus that "we" are a racist society and that "something must be done" to "fight" this innate racism.’

    One commentator said England was a beacon for the rest of Europe when it came to tolerance.

    The other commentator’s said this was an instance of racism and that elements of racism does exist, and needs to be tackled.

    All the above is true – there’s nothing to see here move along.

  9. David

    I may be the only person in the country to say this: I haven’t a clue if racism is at play here. I haven’t seen a single minute of any BB programme, life’s too short and, frankly, it’s shit TV for shit people.

    However ….. of course we’re not a racist country. No nation has been so tolerant of others and when you consider the vast numbers of immigrants foisted upon us without our permission, our tolerance is astonishing. Arab and Persian nations are also, but of course there is never any criticism directed their way.

    There was a fella from the one of these Aunti Nancy League or Unite Against Fascism-type organisations on the radio yesterday morning over here. When he was asked if Jackson’s ‘white trash’ comment is racist he came out, predictably, with a load of Marxist waffle about whities having more money than blackies so it wasn’t racist.

    By the way, that Jade Goody lives around the corner from me (yes, I know, we’ll have to stiffen up West Essex Society’s barriers to riff-raff) and she is genuine trash, a fat ugly pig. I once had the misfortune to sit facing her across an Indian restaurant. It was like seeing food tipped down a dustbin. Whatever’s she’s doing on the stupid programme, it’s no act.

    Anyway …. there are three interesting things about this, none of which are commented upon in the MSM:

    1. David, as you say, racism has been elevated to be the ultimate sin. Sorry liberals, there are many more serious crimes, and racism shouldn’t be a crime anyway.

    2. The Fat Pig, the Fat Pig’s Mother and the other bird are products of modern, liberal Britain. Well done you commie swine.

    3. The middle class liberals of Channel 4 know what the Fat Pig is like and they decided to stick her into the house as a freak show. They decided to put her alongside a fit, articulate Indian bird so we can all laugh. It would only have happened to a white peasant.

  10. Why wasn’t McCann invited ? This kind of thing hits all his hot spots. Can you imagine the fun we’d have ??

  11. Pete in London,

    Would you mind dropping me an email please? If you hit the Email the Editor button top left, it comes to me.


  12. "It would only have happened to a white peasant. " –

    i think we have jades next show here…….

  13. I get the feeling that Pete is about to be invited to become an ATW contributor.

  14. Brilliant Pete, really well said. & yes Big Brother is the modern day equivalent of the ‘penny to see the freak’ shows in the Victorian age- so said someone on the news last night – and entirely right also.

  15. Alison

    I read a columnist in one newspaper claiming that Jade Goody along with Maxine Carr and Rose West was now one of the 3 most hated women in Britain. Well I suppose now that Myra’s no longer with us there was a vacancy to fill.

    You couldn’t make it up !

  16. have yous seen the front page of the sun today ?

    they have used that old trick the irish times use on Paisley, rapid shuttering a monlogue and then print the odd facial expressions that arise………

  17. Colm – I commented last night that id seen that Standard headline you mentioned…priceless! Thing is though as a country we do love to watch this – Big bro or otherwise. Its about more than ‘racism’ and feeding the industry that revolves around that. It is about watching someone we put on a pedestal briefly – being ripped off it in no uncertain terms. Jade was pretty savvy when it came to maximising her part in Big Bro. And for all her bullishness and ignorance she continues to play the game she has been asked to play in and made the most of what she got. I honestly think that when she slammed Shilpa for being a stuck up princess who cared little for the people in the slums in India that she meant it as exactly that. And that people outside of Big Bro would see it as she did and agree. The producuers have set her up to bring her down and Pete is right about their mentality. I wonder if like say…Beckham ..she has it in her to dig herself out of this mess. She has nothing other than her bullishness to fall back on though so i really doubt it. Shilpa on the other hand came here to generate publicity for herself and has done exactly that. When she accused Jade of only being famous for Big Bro i had to laugh as that is precisely how she has arisen to fame here herself.

    The fact that people come out like goverment ministers and say that this is racism as entertainment is also ridiculous. Wy come out now against a programme that has been running for 5 years plus? It also exposes some of Nu Labours legacy and has done for ages.

  18. This is what you get when you have the social engineering trick of replacing education with legislation. When the penalties for a ‘social’ misdemeanor, are more severe than for an act of criminality, it is a good indicator of just how far down the road to totalitarianism we are.

    Trying to force the way people think by threatening them just doesn’t work…

    Most racially based comments are just insults, and should be regarded as such, i.e. – with the contempt they deserve. That Asians are very sensitive to ‘losing face’, is just part of their culture, and there is no place more class and race conscious than the Indian sub-continent.

    To make an international incident out of it is plain ridiculous.

  19. I haven’t seen BB so can’t comment on the apparent racism. However if it is true that the majority of the people are racist, as some commentators seem to be saying, then shouldn’t our politicians be putting the people’s wishes in to action? Perhaps the talking heads should be asked why that isn’t happening (or is it because they know it isn’t true, but just want to cow us even more).

  20. Dr T

    Good point. When the (supposed) wishes of the majority of Britons happen to coincide with the wishes of the liberal establishment and government, ‘democracy’ and ‘the will of the people’ are simply must have its way.

    But there’s an obvious flaw in this plan, because the majority view all too often is at odds with that of London’s liberal class. Where is the will of the people when our membership of the EU is under discussion? Polls have long shown a majority in favour of a return of capital punishment – I must have missed the announcement of a referendum on that part of the criminal justice system.

    As you say, if ours is a racist country, as the Marxists suggest, then let the will of the people have its way and lets get repatriating undesirables. If it’s not a racist country, then they should apologise and then shut up.

  21. "I’m relatively relaxed about Iranians as compared with Pakistanis and Arabs. They should be repatriated and soon.

    That’s correct, Frank. The reasons are that Iranians tend to adapt very quickly to the ways of the west whereas pakistanis and arabs bring their backward (and hate-ridden) culture with them, and keep it. You will have noted that I did not include Hindus and sikhs who are of virtually identical racial origin to (muslim) pakistanis, so I can’t determine the origin of your ‘racist’ claim.

    BTW, I’m white and only whites can be ‘racist’, eh Frank.

  22. I can’t even believe I’m hearing about this in a place as far away as Texas (in many ways!). The British penchant for self-flagelation would put a Shi’ite festival to shame. I’m back to bed now, still early here.

  23. Charles is right. You folks have got to get some damned dignity back. Pretty soon you’ll be as crazy as us here in the States.

  24. Allan@Aberdeen,

    "I’m relatively relaxed about Iranians as compared with Pakistanis and Arabs. They should be repatriated and soon.

    That’s correct, Frank."

    And that makes you a racist.

    "I can’t determine the origin of your ‘racist’ claim."

    And that merely makes you a stupid racist.

  25. off topic, i see that the ‘gulf of tonkin’ incident is underway in the persian gulf.


    military action with iran is far from ‘off the table’.

  26. We in the immigrant nation of Canada are confused; 59% of Quebec’s residents say they are racist while the figure is 47% for the rest of us.
    However 67% of those who said that they were "somewhat racist" felt that multiculturalism enriches their lives.
    (Sun Media and Leger Marketing).
    However I don’t know the parameters this survey used to define racism.

  27. I would have thought that if Britons and our society were as racist as those on the left claim that we are, then such racism would have manifested itself on a larger scale and further up the chain of command. When the left have to grasp at any ‘racist’ straws such as the utterances of someone in a contrived situation in a low-brow TV show, does that not disprove their theory? It merely demonstrates that their definition of ‘racism’ must change to suit any circumstance.

  28. Stu, ‘racism’ is whatever anyone on the left decides it to be for any given case and at any instant. ‘Racism’ can be everywhere and anywhere: it’s all-pervasisve, but only in whites. Whites can even be ‘unwitting’ racists because whites have no control over their thoughts and actions, hence ‘unwitting’.

  29. I think nonwhites are as capable of racism as whites. People have common virtues and vices no matter what their race may be. Charges of racism may be overblown from time to time, and the charges also sometimes calculated for political effect. We can also see overreaction and a lack of common sense in dealing with the situtation. However, just because some folks overreact on the issue is not an excuse to dismiss racism as a soemthing that doesn’t exist.

  30. Mahons

    That only whites can be racist has been the Marxist view for some years now, and it’s a view creeping into institutions and public policy.

    The rationale (if ‘rationale can be applied to anything of the left) is that in the West whites are the dominant race and more wealthy race. Because blacks and Asians are downtrodden they cannot be racist. If blacks and Asians perform a racist act, it can’t be racist as it was forced on them by their downtrodden status. Don’t laugh, they actually believe this.

    For an example of how the Marxist view of things has been creeping into public discourse here, you only have to look at the term ‘institutional racism’. A young black lad (Stephen Lawrence) was murdered on a London street about 10 years ago. No-one was ever charged with the murder and the Police investigation was shown to have been inept in certain areas. It should be noted that the Police weren’t racist in any way during the investigation, just sloppy and not very good at times. A subsequent inquiry, led by a Judge (‘McPherson’) highlighted these faults but went further. McPherson said that the Police was ‘institutionally racist’. This was a new term to most people and is clearly loony. The Ku Klux Klan and the MOBO Awards are clearly racist, their very reason for being is race-based.

    Now this ‘institutionally racist’ phrase has crept and crept and been applied to other institutions. And where did it come from? Who coined it? The racist, anti-semitic, Black Power advocate and Marxist revolutionary Stokely Carmichael, step forward.

    So, it’s mad, it defies logic, it’s dangerous and stands up to the merest intellectual analysis, but it’s Marxist and liberals are in favour and so it goes on.

  31. And *doesn’t* stand up to the merest …. of course.

  32. Mahons, Daytripper, Frank et al: how would you define ‘racism’?

  33. Allan tries to make his racism the fault of "the left" just as he tries to make other problems the fault of "Arabs".

    It’s still obvious that if racism means anything at all then Allan’s ""I’m relatively relaxed about Iranians as compared with Pakistanis and Arabs" is racist.

  34. Pete: I think you are painting liberals with a broad brush. The majority of liberals are not Marxists the same way the majority of conservatives are not facists. While it is true that there are those who would use charges of racism for their own ends, it is equally true that it is present in society and we should endeavor to continue to reduce its impact.

    I do not agree with some people who believe that nonwhites are incapable of racism.

    Allan: I suppose I would simply define racism as a belief in the superiority of a particular race, and an antagonism to other races based upon this.

  35. I define racism as discrimination against a person on grounds of his/her race.

    In real life, a typical example would be rejection of a black applicant for a job in favour of a white where the black applicant had a better claim.

  36. Allan: Fair enough but I am waiting for the other shoe to drop.

  37. So Mahons, would you accept that there is a difference between race and belief/culture systems? Would it be ‘racist’ if I were to declare a belief that cultures of and compatible with western democracy are superior to islam?

  38. And there it drops. Allan – are you asking me is there a difference between race and religion? Are you asking me to compare a form of government (western democracy) with a religion (Islam)? It is a little confusing as to what you are trying to say.

  39. That’s good, Mahons. Clearly you do consider there to be a distinction between race and culture/creed/belief system. So do I.

  40. Alan: Of course discrimination can be based on creed, culture, sex, religion etc., it isn’t limited to race.

  41. To me racism = prejudice + violence. These days we call someone racist when really they are just ignorant or prejudiced. We have lost the ability to distinguish between the two.

    We wouldn’t say of a white who dragged a black man to his death behind a truck prejudiced. We would, or should reserve the superlative term "racist" for such filth. By using the word racist for every chavette who uses the word paki a racist, we water down the term and render it practically meaningless.

    Then when something really racist happens, what do we do. Say it was really, really, really, racist?

  42. Charles,

    "To me racism = prejudice + violence"

    The dictionary doesn’t mention violence.

    "We wouldn’t say of a white who dragged a black man to his death behind a truck prejudiced. "

    But that doesn’t change the fact that he is. We’d call him a racist and a murderer.

  43. Charles: In fairness, there is an element in the blogging world more concerned with the "left’s" accusation of racism and or prejudice than they are with the effect of racism or prejudice. Not everyone comes to the issue as thoughfully as you did.

  44. Frank, Then what about the aforementioned chavette who mutters "paki"?

    Under you scenerio, every offender is a racist and a (fill in the blank).

  45. Thank you Maahons, I like your last sentence! People need to realize that words have power.

  46. The South Shore Schoolboard here in Nova Scotia (Bridgewater) held an election a week or so ago to elect a member for the African Nova Scotian school board seat. There were 2 candidates and 31 citizens voted. A new member was elected 21 to 10 I think it was. However, the unsuccessful candidate complained that many who wanted to vote for him were turned away for their skin was deemed to be too light.
    The election cost $30,000.
    You couldn’t make this stuff up if you tried.

  47. It’s all just a bunch of over sensitive souls ‘crying wolf’. When there is real racism here, they will shout ‘racism’, and no-one will take a blind bit of notice…

    Surely the impact of racist remarks is directly proportional to the credence given to the remarks by the recipient…if they are that sensitive, or have that much of a complex, well then perhaps it’s time they grew up, or if they haven’t ever heard that rhyme re ‘sticks and stones, then perhaps it’s time someone told it to them.

    Sure words have power, but surely not the sort of rubbish so frequently labelled ‘racist’ in our media.

    As Charles said above, save the label for the real thing, such as lynching etc. We are very lucky that all we have at this time is no more serious than bad tempered, ignorant name-calling. Carry on with making mountains out of molehills and we that will soon change to the more violent variety.

  48. Stu, I had to google that as I couldn’t quite believe it! But right you are. Not only does Nova Scoia have a manditory seat for black NV’s, but you have to be black, and only black to vote for them.

    "There is no official list of eligible voters. To cast a ballot, people must have children who consider themselves African-Nova Scotian or they need to be the children of African-Nova Scotians themselves."

    I think Prs. Bush calls this "the soft racism of lowered expectations." The state here is saying, You blacks couldn’t possibly be elected unless we give you a seat. To mak e matters worse, those voting for you have to pass a skin color test!

  49. "We are very lucky that all we have at this time is no more serious than bad tempered, ignorant name-calling."

    Hear, hear.

  50. Thanks Charles, but how black is black? Perhaps a coloured sheet similar to those produced by the paint stores to help you choose a shade may be useful to determine who may vote.
    Have the prospective voter stand next to the shade that is determined to be the cut off point, as it were, to gauge the entitlement to vote.
    Can’t see that there are any shades of black though; it would have to be shades of brown I suppose.

  51. Charles,

    "Frank, Then what about the aforementioned chavette who mutters "paki"?"

    What about them?

    "Under you scenerio, every offender is a racist and a (fill in the blank)."

    No. Some are only racist. That is the point – that racism is a problem in itself.

    The book ‘freakonomics’ (I think) mentions at some point how ‘frown power’ was successfully used against the KKK. In other words simply challenging the racist remarks themselves was very powerful. There is no need to wait for the lynching to face down the racist, after all.

    I agree though that it is a word to be used only where it fits. I just disagree that we cannot call a racist a racist until they start burning crosses and the like.

  52. As usual Frank, use a sledgehammer to crack a nut!

  53. What are you on about Ernest

  54. That is what "we have" in the BB situation. But those who want to pretend that it is more are equally matched by those who would downplay racism.

    Charles – quoting Bush on the "soft racism of lowered expectations" stikes the wrong cord. Typical of Bush having been born on third base thinking he hit a tripple.

  55. Stu – your comments on how black is black are not original. I suspect Charles could tell you of the legal distinctions previuosly in place in his neighboring sate of Louisiana that actually used to measure that distinction by fractions.

  56. I think that we’re all closer to agreement than we would let on. As I was born in the pre-Civil Rights South, questions of race have been there from my earliest memories. I remember a public swimming pool in Dallas that we couldn’t go to anymore because blacks had been allowed in. Or when MLK was shot, I remember someone saying, I’m glad somebody finally shot that SOB, or in East Tx, blacks weren’t allowed across a certain RR track, outside of N****ertown.

    Where I’m going with this diatribe is that I’ve seen and lived in honest to God, boy don’t let the sun go down on your black ass in town, racism. And I’m so glad things have changed. I’m also glad you’re trying to fight it in the UK. But chavettes on the TV ain’t it!

  57. Charles,

    "But chavettes on the TV ain’t it!"

    From what I have heard, I agree.

    But what you’re describing (honest to god racism) is racism unchallenged. That’s just what happens when the racists get brave, or the safety of numbers. The underlying concept is not always that obvious but it is where all that comes from.

    There’s plenty of real racism around here. Not all the targets of racism are black and not all the racists are white. We have the examples from that Dispatches program. And on the other side of the aisle, plenty will agree with the remarks about Arabs from Allan.

  58. "But what you’re describing (honest to god racism) is racism unchallenged"

    Frank, I like the way you worded that, and I agree with it.

  59. Great debate guys – and an emerging consensus with which I agree!

  60. Mahons, original or not it is surely a solution to the problem of who can vote in such elections; the invigilators seem to have set a standard of "blackness" without any demonstration of what shade is acceptable.

  61. Stu – poorly written comment by me as it wasn’t clear. Didn’t mean to accuse you of not being original. Louisiana long had a practice of identifying its citizens based upon the percentage of Negro (as it was called then) blood.

  62. No problem Mahons, how was it done? Shades of colour, or proof or lack of it of ancestry?