Why no real outcry about tory racism?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
23 May 2004
Messages
15,497
Reaction score
737
Country
United Kingdom
So much was made about Labour's anti-semitism by the right wing press, but hardly a peep about the tory racism against muslims from the same media outlets...

"Former Conservative chair Baroness Warsi says a report into Tory Islamophobia shows the party is "institutionally racist" - despite the findings saying otherwise.

Baroness Warsi told Sky News political editor Beth Rigby in an exclusive interview: "I think the findings of this report show clearly that the Conservative Party is institutionally racist, that's based upon the definition of what is institutional racism.

"The way I see it - if it looks like institutional racism, feels like institutional racism, fits the definition of institutional racism - then, I'm afraid it is institutional racism."

I guess the term 'whitewash' says it all when it applies to those of a predominantly different skin colour!

Or that racism by a certain political party is allowed whilst that of another is vilified for political gain!
 
Sponsored Links
Tis all baloney

corbyn may be many things but a racist he is not

neither is the other buffoon Johnson
 
a keen supporter of terrorist organisations though.
I was about to do something pointless and ask you for proof, but then I remembered that you could not care less if what you say is true, all that matters is another opportunity for you to dribble out more bigotry.
 
Sponsored Links
Jews have better lawyers than muslims.
Careful, according to a CNN reporter that comment is anti-Semitic.
‘Israel has deep pockets, controls media’: Pakistan FM accused of anti-semitism in CNN interview
https://indianexpress.com/article/w...ed-of-anti-semitism-in-cnn-interview-7324179/
However, I think there is one fact that might allow Jews to be better represented: we can all probably point to and name any current Muslim politician. I doubt if we would know how many Jewish politicians there are, or who they are.

Of those current MPs and Peers who have noted their religion or ancestry, 9 out of 50 identify as Muslim Conservatives. Whereas 15 out of 32 identify as Jewish Conservatives.
The Jewish list goes way back to pre-1900. Whereas the Muslim list deals only with the current MPs and Peers.
References.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_Muslims

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_Jewish_politicians

I am aware that this comment of mine might be considered to border on anti-Semitism, even though it only pulls together some genuine facts, the intent could be interpreted as anti-Semitic. It wasn't intended to be. It was merely looking at the representation of Muslims and Jews in the current Tory government. But such is the broad brush definition of anti-Semitism, especially in the light of the motivation for the experience of Jews in the 1930's, compared to what is considered racially offensive of other ethnicities or religions.
 
Last edited:
However, I think there is one fact that might allow Jews to be better represented: we can all probably point to and name any current Muslim politician. I doubt if we would know how many Jewish politicians there are, or who they are.
Maybe that also has something to do with the likely skin colour of a muslim and their name?

And Jewish name changes due to fears of anti semitism?

I know of a friend whose Jewish grandparents when they came to Britain changed their surnames by deed poll.
 
So how did they come up with the conclusion of institutional racism in the party based on what?
I've not read or heard about it until now, and I am being lazy and can't be bothered to trawl through Google to get a balanced view
 
I've not read or heard about it until now, and I am being lazy and can't be bothered to trawl through Google to get a balanced view
Maybe you're not bothered because the target of the racism are Muslims not Jews?
So how did they come up with the conclusion of institutional racism in the party based on what?
If you googled that you would understand.

The Labour party have 'friends of Palestine' and 'friends of Israel' groups...

The tories only have a 'friends of Israel' group...

Plus the right wing press hammered away at Labour over racism but have virtually ignored the institutional racism in the tory party...

But the decades of that institutional racism history in the tory party is there if you could be bothered to look!
 
But the decades of that institutional racism history in the tory party is there if you could be bothered to look!
What's the % of ethnic vote that this racist party got in the national and local elections?
 
So how did they come up with the conclusion of institutional racism in the party based on what?
I've not read or heard about it until now, and I am being lazy and can't be bothered to trawl through Google to get a balanced view
Baroness Warsi had made accusations of institutional Islamophobia and provided 30 complaints as example. She obviously had an opinion prior to the investigation and because the investigation find some evidence of Islamophobia, but not the institutionalised Islamophobia she believed existed, she disagrees with the report.

The report basically says that there is some anti muslim sentiment at local tory party levels, but that the party investigated and acted on anti-muslim complaints in a fair manner that was equal to the actions taken on other types of complaints. It says that there were no attempts by the party to intervene in any of the investigations. It also says that the perception of Tory Islamaphobia is greater that the reality, based on the complaints that it investigated.
 
Is being "anti-catholic" like the Royal Family and hence the country has been since Henry VIII racist?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsored Links
Back
Top