Hope for honkeys?

Some time ago, a lady of colour called another lady a ‘coconut’, and was promptly reported to the race relations stasi.

 

I understand that it means that the person has a dark exterior but has the mind-set, values, and culture of the English. But I don’t understand it as racist. Surely it is a compliment to say ‘You may be an Indian by race, but this is the country of your birth and you are English through and through’. Isn’t assimilation what made the US great and why it has been to absorb thousands of Asians who have made a spectacular contribution to their adopted country?

 

Then we had the case of the footballer who called another player a ‘******* black ****. Only one of the three words was true, but the wowsers were not concerned with the foul language. If the black footballer had called the white guy a ******* white ****, would the outcome have been the same? And the recent case of the police refusing to take action against gypsies who had stolen a guy’s caravan. Same question.

 

I remember the case of the mixed-race couple who wanted to adopt. The authorities refused to approve them because the husband was too light and the wife too dark, thus succeeding in discriminating against husband, wife and adoptive child simultaneously. Shades of apartheid and racial classification!

 

Isn’t multiculturalism the true racism, because it says in effect ‘you may live here but you should carry on as if you were still in the Hindu Cush, because you will never be like us’? Perhaps the real racists are the race-wowsers because they believe that people of colour are so inadequate and incapable of shifting for themselves that they need special protection against whitey.

 

Now we have that daft truck that carries an ‘illegal immigrants go home’ slogan which the authorities believe will cause all illegals to make a mad dash for the Dover ferry.

 

Accuse them of terminal stupidity, if you like. That would be justified and popular. But how can this possibly be ‘racist’?

 

‘Racism’ is the belief that one’s own race is inherently superior to all others, or unfavourable discrimination against another purely on the grounds of the person’s race.

 

This definition would of course, be quite incomprehensible to the race relations wowsers. Their definition would be ‘white, male working class’, nothing more.

 

To them, people of colour are incapable of racism. They can only be discriminated against, not vice versa. Try telling that to the Karen, Shan and Rohinga people in Burma, the Tamils in Sri Lanka, the South Sudanese, the Somalis in Kenya, and many other places. The genocide in Ruanda was racist, not political. In parts of Africa where I have lived, the discrimination by Asians against Africans has been painful to observe.

 

But there is a consolation. The word ‘racist’ is now bandied about so promiscuously that it is ceasing to have any meaning.

 

There may be hope for honkeys yet.