'RACISM' LACKS A DEFINITION, Let's Thank GOD! by Brian Bamford

IN 1959, I went to the branch meeting of my local Rochdale ETU branch one Friday night to try to raise the issue of the boycott of South African goods with the elctricians there. I was a 19-year-old apprentice at the time and the TUC, the Labour Party and the Liberal Party had all declared their backing for this international campaign which had been called for in November 1959 by the Movement for Colonial Freedom.

As a young man I was surprised first by the lack of interest of the ETU branch officers, and remember the ETU was then regarded as a militant communist trade union, who despite my protests didn't see any point in my request that the branch should discuss the international boycott campaign. They were too busy collecting the members subscription as they were queuing-up to pay before going out on the razzle as it was Friday night. As I tried to interest a West Indian electrician the chairman, who had become tired of my appeals for support, asked the assembled members if anyone was anxious to discuss the topic of the boycott of South African goods? The silence was deafening! Even the one black man present didn't show any interest.

It took many more years of international struggle before South Africa obtained anything approaching freedom and aparthied was removed.

Yet according to Kader Asmal: ‘If any event galvanised the Boycott Movement into action it was Chief Albert Luthuli’s plea for sanctions”¦’ Luthuli’s statement reads: ‘I appeal to all governments throughout the world, to people everywhere, to all organisations and institutions in every land and at every level to act now to impose such sanctions on South Africa that will bring about the vital necessary change and avert what can become the greatest African tragedy of our time.’

Apathy & Pleading Petitions

I was reminded of this disinterested apathy of these 1950's north of England trade unionists when I was recently urged to sign a petition to support the three footballers who according to the media had been racially abused for missing a penalty in last Sunday's Euro Final.

The protest petition reads:

'Three black football players have received a storm of racist abuse after England lost the final. We can't let such hatred go unchallenged -- so let's meet it with a deafening public cry of support from across the country. Add your name to the public letter below, and when we reach 100,000 names, Avaaz will publish in a major national newspaper.'

The petition pleads the case further:

'Within minutes of England losing the match, Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook were flooded with cruel, racist messages towards the players. Boris Johnson and Home Secretary Priti Patel have since condemned the abuse -- but only after they'd originally undermined anti-racism gestures by the team earlier in the competition.'

'Let's show these three black players, and the whole country, that racism has no place here. That as ordinary citizens, we will not sit by as a small minority of people spew their hatred and ignorance. But more than that, let's show the children of this country what it truly means to be English, Scottish, Irish, Welsh and BRITISH in the 21st century.'

Worthy words indeed!

'Racism' is not defined! Racial discrimination is!

My understanding is that the United Nations (UN) does not define 'racism' as such; however, it does define 'racial discrimination'. According to the 1965 UN International Convention of the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, '...the term "racial discrimination" shall mean any distintion, exclusion, restriction, or prefernce base on race, colour, desent, or national or ethnic origin that has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundimental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life.'[

'Racism' is clearly not defined by the UN because it is ambiguous and is often used as an ideological swear word by the liberal left in much the same way as the word 'Facist' was used in the 1930s as a term of abuse. Despite the fact that one such petition had more than a million signatures on it according to Woman's Hour today I doubt that the culture will change and I suspect that many people will find this kind od virtue signaling turns their stomachs. Even if Gareth Southgate OBE is ever such a nice bloke.

As they say 'Everything Changes, Everything Stays the Same'.

*******************************************************************

'Muslimness': What's it all in aid of?

by Brian Bamford

BRING ON the Bandwaggon of Muslim Awareness!

AFZAL KHAN MP for Manchester Gorton, wrote to Rochdale Council:

'I am writing to you in my capacity as vice-chair of the All Parliamentary Group on British Muslims. As you may be aware, in 2018 we published our report on 'Islamophobia Defined: the inquiry into a working definition of islamophobia'. The definition is 'Islamophobia is rooted in racism and a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or a perceived of Muslimness', and includes an inexhaustive number of contemporary examples of Islamophobia. It has now been adopted by over eight hundred organisations, such as Manchester and Salford City Councils, Bury MBC, and the Greater Manchester Combined Authority.

'Islamophobia is sadly rife across Britain - including the media and public life - and can have distressing real life implications for our Muslim community, including the threat of violence. We have seen during this Covid-19 pandemic that people of Muslim heritage have been dispropotionately affected. This Muslim Awareness Month, is the responsibility of everyone, including all levels of government, to tackle this insidious hatred.'

Yesterday, a concerned Carl Faulkner wrote in response to this that: 'Rochdale Labour and Rochdale Council have adopted a definition of Islamophobia that actually has no legal standing, but is simply something that has been pushed upon them by Afzal Khan MP.'

A CAREER BUILT on being MUSLIM

Afzal Khan was born in Pakistan and came to the UK aged 11. After leaving school without qualifications, he had a number of jobs, including as a Greater Manchester Police constable, before returning to education and qualifying as a solicitor:[1] He is now a partner of solicitors Mellor & Jackson in Oldham.

Khan was first elected a Labour Councillor in 2000, being re-elected in 2004, 2007 and 2011, representing Cheetham Ward. He served as Executive Member for Children's Services. Khan became the first Muslim Lord Mayor of Manchester, taking the position for 2005–2006.

In 2010, Khan was appointed CBE for his race relations work.

In March 2017, he applied to be Labour's candidate in the 2017 Manchester Gorton by-election and was officially selected on 22 March.[14] During the by-election, he said "I condemn the statements made by Ken Livingstone and I believe there is no place for anti-Semitism in the Labour Party." He added, "I have been a lifelong campaigner against racism and anti-Semitism. In 2008, I was awarded a CBE in part for my work encouraging greater understanding between Muslims and Jews."

GORTON's FASHION for 'FOOT in the MOUTH' MPs

Khan was again selected for as the Labour candidate for Gorton in the general election and was elected, becoming Manchester's first Muslim MP.[17] In July 2017, Khan was appointed Shadow Immigration Minister.

However, in July 2019, Khan had to humbly apologised when he shared on Facebook two years earlier a video of American comedian Jon Stewart talking about Benjamin Netanyahu. The text under the video referred to an "Israel-British-Swiss-Rothschilds crime syndicate" and "mass murdering Rothschilds Israeli mafia criminal liars". Khan said he was "mortified", claiming "I didn't read the text below, which contained an anti-Semitic conspiracy about the Rothschilds. I would never have shared it if I had seen that".

It may be worth mentioning that from 1983-2017, Sir Gerald Kaufman, Father of the House of Commons, represented the same Manchester Gorton constituency. And should I say funnily enough in November 2015, he too was castigated by none other than Jeremy Corbyn for claiming: “It’s Jewish money, Jewish donations to the Conservative party – as in the general election in May – support from the Jewish Chronicle, all of those things, bias the Conservatives,” Kaufman said. “There is now a big group of Conservative members of parliament who are pro-Israel whatever government does and they are not interested in what Israel, in what the Israeli government does.

“They’re not interested in the fact that Palestinians are living a repressed life, and are liable to be shot at any time. In the last few days alone the Israelis have murdered 52 Palestinians and nobody pays attention and this government doesn’t care.”

At that time predictable Jeremy Corbyn released a statement saying that Kaufman’s remarks were 'completely unacceptable and deeply regrettable'. He added 'Such remarks are damaging to community relations, and also do nothing to benefit the Palestinian cause,' he said. 'I have always implacably opposed all forms of racism, antisemitism and Islamophobia and will continue to do so. At my request, the chief whip has met Sir Gerald and expressed my deep concern.'

In such a climate of clumsy bumbling blundering politicians, can we be sure that the smart suited former solicitor Afzal Khan MP for Gorton, will not fall foul again of the standards and the taboos of the Muslimness criterior, which he and others are recomending? Or is it just another opportunity for virtue signaliing

********************************************************************************

'White Lives Matter': In defence of doggerel

 Black and White who is right?

 by Brian Bamford

 'Eliot’s fondness for doggerel and light verse, in particular, was intertwined with a racist notion of blackness as a gateway to cultural disruption and linguistic play.'*

• The New YorkerDec 16, 2019

IT was announced last night that the Lancashire police have said that no criminal offence took place when a banner reading 'White Lives Matter Burnley' was towed past the football stadium during Monday night’s Premier League game between Manchester City and Burnley.  It is perfectly clear by now that the language being used here has become 'a gateway to cultural disruption and linguistic play' that is having massive consequences even as I write.

We at Northern Voices would find broad qualified agreement with what Iffy Onuora, the equalities officer of the Professional Footballers’ Association, said on Tuesday that he was hoping that the widespread condemnation of the banner would act as a catalyst for further conversations about the Black Lives Matter movement.  And he concluded:

'The words themselves aren’t offensive, it’s just the context.  It’s the rejection of the conversation we’re having at the moment.  That’s what it represents,' Onoura told the BBC.  'I guess people have the right to do it. For me it’s just proof again that these things can lead to positive things because all that’s been said in the 12 hours since the game finished has been, again, a catalyst, another conversation to have.'

Let's have conversations yes, yet I think we would add that it throws light on the two-faced hypocrisy of some people who are obsessed with skin colour.  What has happened since the flight on Monday night is that it brought forth a barrage of unbelievable humbug and virtue signalling by the most feeble minded elements on the left.

Meanwhile the police have said that after assessing all the information available surrounding the incident, the force had concluded 'that there are no criminal offences that have been disclosed at this time'.
'We will continue to work with our partners at the football club and within the local authority,' added Ch Supt Russ Procter.

I accept that the meaning of words are in their use rather than in the dictionary definition.  But the use of doggerel can be problematic. When more than a decade ago in moving a motion, I broke into some doggerel at a Trade Union Council conference; I was denouncing what are called scabs or sometimes dare I say 'blacklegs' - unskilled workers, who were being used I used rhyming slang or doggerel as 'Chancers - Bengal Lancers' to describe the strike breakers, sadly and predictably, I was challenged for 'racist' talk. 

I do worry about all this po-faced lack of humour on the British left.

*  

Sometimes doggerel has a non-critical meaning: plenty of popular comic poets (like Lewis Carroll or any limerick inventor) had no aim to make great art, just great light verse, and they succeeded brilliantly. They were masters of doggerel. But pity the earnest highbrow poet like the immortal Scotsman William McGonagall whose doggerel was so bad his audience frequently pelted him with eggs and rotting vegetables. Now his poetry was only fit for the dogs.

*******************************

Virtue Signalling & Petitioning Governments?

by Brian Bamford

ON the 14th, April Charles Charalambous commented: 

'We seem to be talking at cross-purposes.  An editorial 

in a political publication does not aim to be a philosophical tract, 

and by definition its starting-point is a particular worldview 

(which, evidently, you don't share).'

Charles Charalambous represents a body affiliated to the 

4th International and is editor of Labour Internationalist.

Northern Voices doesn't favour the kind of petitioning

culture which Mr. Charalambous credits by describing

this practice as a 'world view'.  We do not want to 

be a wet blanket, but we believe this approach could 

have unintended consequences.  Charles is a lead
signatory of the petition we publish beneath my critique.

BELOW A BODY of trade unionists have emerged in the current crisis to call upon the government to institute certain changes and to submit to a list of demands in  a campaign to relieve the pressures upon us.

Is it a wish list?  Or is it merely virtue signalling by persons who are simply displaying their own impotence?

It might be as well to recognise that there are more than one type of petition:

Protest petitions generally aim mainly to show discontent; they play the same role as demonstrations: safety valve, expression of dissatisfaction in relation to an act, decision or policy. In an age of internet and social media, protest petitions can gain traction very quickly.  The Trump petitions some time ago when 2 million people signed a petition opposing Donald Trump’s state visit to the UK are but one example of this type, as was the one that received over 4 million signatures asking for a second EU referendum.

Substantive petitions aim primarily to change a situation.  This tends to
relate to issues that people feel very strongly about, either because they are personal and affect them directly, or because they are part of a very strong
set of convictions held over a period of time.  So these are very different to protest petitions.  Recent examples include the petitions on Meningitis B,
the one(s) on Grouse shooting, and the one asking that stillborn babies are 
given a birth certificate – the latter one with far fewer signatures.   Ultimately, this type of petition aims to change a situation, but in the process of doing so it aims first and foremost to raise awareness.

Cristina Leston-Bandeira situates the process within a broader policy-
making context.  She explains that petitions are an effective way of raising awareness or showing discontent, and that the adoption of public demands
into policy remains subject to the usual political process.


She writes:
'As we know, it is very rare for policy change to happen quickly; if not 
originated by the government, it is usually the result of sustained campaigning through a variety of means. Whether a substantive petition achieves a change 
in policy is often not the main question.  The key starting point is whether it raises awareness of the issue, and whether it raises the profile of a specific 
issue enough to lead government to eventually agree for change.  After all, 
one of the most famous cases of petitioning – votes for women (if you prefer 
a more grown-up account then try here) – took a few years and more than 
one petition before it actually led to any change.  So, different petitions have different purposes and perform different roles.  Petitions also enable what is known as the “fire-alarm” role: an opportunity to raise issues bottom-up, 
outside the political agenda.'

In the case of the petition below this slow process in policy change may
simply serve to display the helplessness of the proponents of the demands.
Thus it could have the reverse effect to that intended by the signatories.

**************************************

Trade Union Petition Covid-19:

Let’s come together to push for the basic emergency measures 
that democracy requires.

We reject “One rule for the rich, another for the rest”!

Protect working people, not the banks and big business!

The working class must defend its own interests, and on an independent basis!

Requisition the £350 billion given to the banks and businesses 
and apply it to these emergency measures to directly protect the population:

– All personal protection equipment (PPE) of the necessary standard to be 
sourced immediately, including by requisition, and delivered immediately 
where needed by NHS staff and care-home staff;

– Requisition big companies to serve in the production of ventilators, masks,
testing kits, healthcare beds and everything that is lacking today in the NHS;

– Free diagnostic testing for all, free antibody testing for all. All private testing
and processing facilities, as well as all other private healthcare resources,
to be immediately requisitioned and incorporated into the NHS.

– Free distribution of masks to the whole population;

– Ban “temporary” lay-offs and job-cuts;

– Ban bogus self-employment;

– Full pay immediately, not in May or June, for all self-isolated workers, 
whatever their work status;

– Paid time off to care for children when there is no other option available;

- All employers to be legally bound by the Health and Safety at Work etc. 
Act 1974, the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, 
and the Employment Rights Act 1996, which together give employees the 
right to leave their place of work if they feel they are in “serious 
and imminent” danger;

– Financial security for all: scrap Universal Credit;

– Moratorium on all debt and the payment of rent and rental charges
(utilities, etc.);

– All social benefits and support allowances to be paid immediately, 
not in May or June;

– Staple foods and basic goods to be distributed for free to people in difficulty;

– Requisition vacant/available premises to provide accommodation to
the homeless and poorly-housed;

– Scrap all Private Finance Initiative (PFI) contracts, which have been
a tool for commercialising education and privatising the NHS;

– Repeal the Coronavirus Act 2020, replace it with properly scrutinised
measures that do not restrict civil liberties.

We, workers (full-time and part-time, on secure and insecure contracts), homemakers, pensioners, students and youth, say: These 
are immediate measures that are needed to avoid medical and economic carnage. They cannot wait.

We will not accept more of the same – what is happening now cannot be allowed to happen again.

First signatories:

Mike Calvert, Deputy Branch Secretary, Islington UNISON, London (pers. cap.)

Charles Charalambous, ex-President, Torbay and South Devon TUC (pers. cap.), Editor of Labour Internationalist

Stefan Cholewka, Secretary, Greater Manchester Association of Trades
Union Councils ((on behalf of GMATUC)

Sheila Coleman, Unite Community, Liverpool (pers. cap.)

Jane Doolan, UNISON NEC member, Branch Secretary, Islington
UNISON, London (pers. cap.)

Paul Filby, Labour Party member, Liverpool (pers. cap.)

Stephen Hall, President, Greater Manchester Association of Trades
Union Councils

Diana James, Assistant Branch Secretary, Islington UNISON, London
(pers. cap.)

Paul Kelly, Vice President, Greater Manchester Association of
Trades Union Councils

Doreen McNally, Unite Community, Liverpool (pers. cap.)

Henry Mott, Branch Secretary, Southwark Unite, London (pers. cap.)

Billy Murphy, Unite Community, Liverpool (pers. cap.)

Tony Rimmer, Vice-Chair, Unite 567 Branch; Chair, Bootle CLP;
Liverpool47 surcharged Labour councillor (pers. cap.)

John Sweeney, Labour Party member, Leave activist, London (pers. cap.)

Margaret K. Taylor, Labour Party member, Treasurer, Rochdale
Metropolitan Borough Trades Council (on behalf of RMBTC)

Matt Webb, general secretary, Brighton & Hove District
Trades Union Council (on behalf of B&HDTUC)

Sarah Wooley, general secretary, The Bakers Food and Allied Workers Union (on behalf of BFAWU) 

I endorse these demands

In a personal capacity / On behalf of my organisation