# data[].attributes.body
•Establishing working groups to develop and operationalise the branch’s anti-racist organising

•Compiling & communicating existing branch anti-racist work, including resisting Prevent and the BAME pay and awarding gaps

•Strategizing with our sibling unions (Unison, Unite, USSU) in making this a lasting and joined-up project

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
UCU Sussex stands in solidarity with Black staff and students at the University. We also stand with all those protesting against police brutality and working to dismantle white supremacy within Sussex, the UK, the USA and worldwide.

We ask you to sign this addressed to the Vice Chancellor Adam Tickell, organised by Sussex PhD students. This is the first in a series of anti-racist actions we will encourage members and colleagues to take in the weeks and months ahead.

We applaud critiques of the University's position on racial inequality made by UNISON Equalities Officer and co-leader of the BAME Staff Network, , and fully support the statement made by . As the USSU notes in its own strong , the University is not, and cannot be, a neutral space. It reproduces forms of knowledge rooted in imperialism and secures forms of structural violence across its institutions and practices, including anti-Black racism.

While the University's Executive Management is keen to highlight Sussex's history of anti-racism, and to issue vague words about its commitment to addressing racial injustice, we see little action. Sussex joined the Race Equality Charter in 2018 , but has still not agreed its terms of reference. Indeed, our Vice Chancellor until recently that the US is divided more deeply by racism than the UK. It is of no surprise, then, that, Black, Asian, and minority ethnic (BAME) staff and students at Sussex have had to undertake the work of educating the University management, and they have been expected to fill in where the University has been found wanting. The University of Sussex Executive Group (UEG) has begun to acknowledge 'uncomfortable truths' about its previous failings and has now committed publicly to engage in 'critical self-reflection' and to 'do better'. We urge them to demonstrate their commitment to anti-racism and Black Liberation by acting on the demands expressed in the .

In addition to continuing the work of our branch members on ending the hostile environment and anti-racist political education , we are also in the process of formulating a list of demands for the UEG, based in consultation with our BAME members and anti-racist activist projects at Sussex, calling for a course of concrete actions to end institutional racism at Sussex. As a majority white branch, we know that we, too, need to better support the lives and work of Black staff and students, and staff and students of colour, and to step up our fight against racism both within Sussex and in Higher Education more broadly.

In the coming weeks we will be consulting with our sibling unions and student activist groups in plans to hold an open meeting dedicated to anti-racist organising at Sussex. Please attend if you can. Agenda items can be submitted to .

Please also get in touch if you have issues to raise about racism in our workplace or ideas to share about anti-racist activism the branch could support or get involved in.

In solidarity, now and always,

UCU Sussex Executive and Reps

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
UCU Sussex stands in solidarity with Black staff and students at the University. We also stand with all those protesting against police brutality and working to dismantle white supremacy within Sussex, the UK, the USA and worldwide. We ask you to sign this addressed to the Vice Chancellor Adam Tickell, organised by Sussex PhD students.

# data[].attributes.headline
Our initial statement on dismantling white supremacy at Sussex. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Our initial statement on dismantling white supremacy at Sussex. 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The most recent Black Lives Matter protests precipitated by the murder of George Floyd in the US have accelerated a polarisation in debates about the nature of "race" and racism in the UK and other "liberal democratic" states. Hard coded into the movement's very name is a recognition of the fact that black people experience systematic harm and death in structures of white supremacy. 'Black Lives Matter' is a powerful message which carries with it both an acknowledgement of the realities of white supremacy and an invitation to dismantle its structures. Here in the context of UK Higher Education, Sussex UCU is striving to respond to this call by recognising that the work of dismantling white supremacy needs to be done in British universities too. Our first step is to centre the demands of and break white silence about the existence of white supremacy. In this blog post, we show why naming white supremacy as the thing against which we should all be struggling in solidarity, is essential in how Sussex UCU organises.

Firstly, recognising white supremacy as a set of intersecting social, political and economic structures which accrue benefits for those racialised as "white", as Frances Lee Ansley and Remi Joseph-Salisbury argue, provides a robust response to the claims "all lives matter". Those who also argue that "white lives matter", are examples of white backlash, which is powerfully explored in the work of . The most generous interpretation of this backlash is one of a lack of understanding around what it means to not be white. "At best, white people have been taught not to mention that people of colour are "different" in case it offends us. They truly believe that the experiences of their life as a result of their skin colour can and should be universal." Reni Eddo-Lodge wrote these words in a titled, "Why I am not longer talking to white people about race." In short, these are people who do not comprehend the structural advantages they experience simply by the virtue of being racialised as white. Eddo-Lodge would go on to expand her post into a book of the same name. In the wake of the BLM protests her book has received renewed interest, making her the first black British author to top the UK book charts. This fact alone tells us a great deal about the deep-rooted racial inequalities in Britain. Indeed, Eddo-Lodge has on the implications of her book's resurgence in popularity: " The work of anti-racism requires a level of self reflection that I don't feel is coming from all the people or organisations that now say Black Lives Matter".

Of course, the "white lives" and "all lives" arguments are more commonly made by white supremacist hate groups, but they also have mainstream traction: the "all lives matter" riposte particularly so. The risk of focusing on these hate groups - though they cannot be ignored - is that racism becomes a matter of an extremist fringe. Instead, we must understand "race" and racism as deeply entrenched within and unavoidably foundational to economic, political and cultural spheres of life, including spaces of education; it is not a relic of a regrettable past, but a continuing force that shapes and directs the present. When we talk of white supremacy this is what we mean, as the Frances Ansley quote that heads this blog post so effectively articulates. The BLM movement has brought the concept of structural racism into the realm of popular discourse, but liberal understandings of racism as a matter of individual bias or prejudice still persist within universities and distract us from the work that needs to be done. These biases are a product of the very white supremacy they are reluctant to acknowledge and seek to distance themselves from.

Sara Ahmed wrote in , that practices of "diversity" within universities (under the banner of Equality, Diversity and Inclusion initiatives ), which are supposedly aimed at making institutions more inclusive, instead work to further entrench whiteness. Ahmed has that naming or complaining about the white supremacy embedded in university structures and cultures is often met with hostile and defensive responses, which reveals that "talking about racism means dealing with the racism articulated in response to what you are talking about". And so the Ivory Tower continues to reproduce itself in its own white history and colonial legacies, tempered by the performative uses of " diversity as damage control " through EDI policy frameworks lacking political education and commitments to material transformation.

UCU Sussex wants to dismantle these structures of white supremacy at our university, but even as we organise around these issues, we are aware that we are a part of these same structures as the rest of society and must educate ourselves and learn from the experience of others. One of our first activities in this endeavour is to establish an anti-racism reading group, which will begin by discussing Jason Arday and Heidi Mirza's edited collection Dismantling Race in Higher Education: Racism, Whiteness and Decolonising the Academy (2018). If this reading group, and our anti-racism work more broadly, is a project that you would like to be involved in, we urge you to get in touch.
UCU Sussex Anti-Racist Action Working Group

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The most recent Black Lives Matter protests precipitated by the murder of George Floyd in the US have accelerated a polarisation in debates about the nature of "race" and racism in the UK and other "liberal democratic" states.

# data[].attributes.body
•Learning from, supporting & building relationships with existing campus groups & organisations doing anti-racist and decolonial work:

•Planning a campus-wide meeting on anti-racist organising in collaboration with staff & student activist and community groups

# data[].attributes.body
•Facilitating a programme of political education on antiracist organising within the branch

•Developing a review of unconscious bias and race-related training provided by the university, which has been deemed unfit for purpose

•Lobbying university management to review their training offer and commit to progressive anti-racist education for both staff and students

# data[].attributes.body
•Engaging with members, particularly BAME members, on institutional changes that need to be made to tackle anti-Black racism and other structural racisms at Sussex

•Developing inclusive, participatory & ethical ways to gather evidence on the experiences and outcomes of people who are subject to racism at Sussex

# data[].attributes.body
•Holding University management to account, requesting a standing item on institutional racism in negotiations and regular reports from management on how it is tackling anti-black and other structural racisms at Sussex

•Developing, in consultation with members, staff and students, a set of demands for UEG aimed at dismantling white supremacy at Sussex

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Aim:

Decolonise Sussex is a student-led campaign that aims to raise awareness of and challenge the complex and varied legacies of racism, imperialism and colonialism within all spheres of our university. We aim to ensure and lobby that the university of Sussex is aware of and actively dismantling structural inequalities rather than perpetuating them.

Objectives

Overall

To raise awareness and encourage dialogue about structural inequalities within the University

We want the university to be concerned with questions around knowledge production such as: where "universal knowledge" comes from, what is being excluded from our curriculum, what power structures are shaping our university?

Academic change

To challenge existing power structures within curriculum and teaching methods.

To support curriculum reviews that challenge Eurocentrism and encourage critical and nuanced teaching across all the university.

To support students in being active participants in their education and lobby the university to actively address the access, engagement and attainment gaps caused by structural inequalities at all levels of study.

Research

To gather existing research and undertake new research that can be employed to raise awareness of the structural inequalities that continue to shape our institution and to lobby the university and inform future policy.

Events and Creative outlets

to gather, create and distribute informative and creative content that raises awareness of the legacies of colonialism within the university and amplify marginalised voices, i.e. blogs, podcasts.

To organise events and actions that encourage dialogue and critical reflection about the impact of racism, colonialism and imperialism in shaping between all members of the university, i.e workshops, poetry nights

Get involved

Weekly meetings: Mondays, 6-8pm (during term time)

We usually meet weekly to plan for year and discuss our ideas. To stay updated on meetings times and location, follow our Facebook page or email decolonise@sussexstudent.com so you can be added to our mailing list

Contact:

Email: decolonise@sussexstudent.com

Facebook: Decolonise Sussex

Instagram: @decolonisesussex

Join a working group:

We have formed different working groups focusing on different aspects of the campaign and its organisation. You can get in touch with and join the working group(s) you'd like by clicking on the links below.

Organising Team: This group is for anyone who would like to be involved in the core leadership and organisation of the campaign and its administrative side.

Academic Change Team: This group specifically focuses on tackling strucutural inequalities inside the classroom and challenging existing power structures within curricula and pedagogy. It will notably focus on running 'decolonising forums' in order to facilitate discussions with staff and students around decolonising the curriculum. This has already proved successful in departments such as Philosophy which implemented curriculum changes following its forum.

Events Team: The events team is charge of organising and running events throughtout the year including film screenings as well as poetry and slam events. Decolonise Sussex has already hosted a number of events this year as part of Black History Month including an Introduction to the First Black Studies Degree in the UK, poetry worshops and performance evenings, and a panel discussion on women of colour in publishing.

Creative Team: Our creative team focuses on gathering, creating and distributing informative and creative content and resources that raise awareness for the campaign and its goals. We are currently developing a blog and podcast and are a planning on publishing a zine.

Research Team: The research team aims to collect existing research and undertake and formulate research that can be employed to raise awareness of the structural inequalities that shape our institution and to lobby the university to tackle them.

Collaboration and Networking Team: This group focues on building links relationships with other groups and campaigns both within and outside Sussex.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Decolonise Sussex is a student-led campaign that aims to raise awareness of and challenge the complex and varied legacies of racism, imperialism and colonialism within all spheres of our university. We aim to ensure and lobby that the university of Sussex is aware of and actively dismantling structural inequalities rather than perpetuating them.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Our staff networks play an important role in achieving our goals outlined in our equality, diversity and inclusion strategy, Inclusive Sussex. The networks provide staff with the opportunity to meet with colleagues from across campus and get involved with network activities.

BAME Staff Network

The University's BAME Staff Network is for all staff who define themselves as belonging to a minority ethnic group.

If you would like to join the network to receive notification of meetings and events you can find out more by emailing BAME-Staff@sussex.ac.uk

Staff Disability Network

The staff disability network is for members of university staff who have a disability.The network meets termly and seeks to raise awareness across campus.

If you would like to join the network or would like further information you can contact the network by emailing staffdisabilitynetwork@sussex.ac.uk

Trans and non-binary Staff Network

The TransNonbinary Staff Network is a confidential and a fully inclusive group, open to all members of staff or postgraduates who identify as transnonbinary. It will meet occasionally to discuss and review policy development, as well as organising different events throughout the year.

If you would like to join the network or would like further information you can contact the network by emailing the mailing list transnonbinarystaff@sussex.ac.uk. The mailing list is monitored and - to ensure confidentially - is accessed only by the Trans Convenor.

LGBT+ Staff Network

The University's LGBT+ Staff Network seeks to increase awareness and understanding of LGBT+ issues.

You can find out more on Twitter and Facebook, or by emailing lgbt-staff@sussex.ac.uk.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Our staff networks play an important role in achieving our goals outlined in our equality, diversity and inclusion strategy, Inclusive Sussex. The networks provide staff with the opportunity to meet with colleagues from across campus and get involved with network activities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Introducing the SU's new BAME Ambassadors

A new team of students working for the University of Sussex Students' Union want to hear from black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) students to ensure they are heard and better represented.

Over the next few weeks, the Ambassadors will be trying to speak to as many BAME students as possible, so that they can build a picture of the BAME student experience at Sussex and feed it back to the University's senior managers.

If you are a Sussex student and you identify as BAME, you can contact one of the BAME Ambassadors in the six participating schools:

There are also four BAME Ambassadors for foundation year students:

If there isn't an Ambassador for your school, or you would prefer to write about your experiences rather than speaking about them, you can complete an online survey.

You can also follow the BAME Ambassadors on social media:

The Students' Union received funding from the University to recruit the new BAME Ambassadors, who are paid advocates for their peers.

Similar schemes have found success in other institutions, successfully bringing to the forefront the voices of students from BAME backgrounds and helping to implement change.

If you'd like to leave a comment, enter your ITS username, password, and your comment. The comment may need approval before it is displayed, so don't expect your comment to appear right away.

By submitting a comment you are agreeing to the Acceptable Use Policy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
University of Sussex and Students' Union

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Introducing the SU's new BAME Ambassadors

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A new team of students working for the University of Sussex Students' Union want to hear from black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) students to ensure they are heard and better represented.

# data[].attributes.body
Collaboratively compiled by Library and Academic Staff and Students at University of Sussex

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Unconscious Bias training (UBT) as the default or preferred method to combat or reduce discrimination and prejudice in the workplace and other institutional settings, is continuing to attract significant criticisms and pushback on methodological, political and ethical grounds. In our opinion, those criticisms are warranted. Valid. And require thorough reflection.

Tackling the reproduction of racism, discrimination and exclusion at micro-levels within organisations is ABSOLUTELY necessary and although all unconscious bias training courses are certainly not created equal... racism occurs at ALL levels of organisational functioning and processes, including at meso and macro levels (e.g. groups dynamics, institutional policies and procedures, organisational culture).

Thus...let's be clear that;

*Exclusively or primarily focusing on unconscious bias to tackle racial (& other) inequality is a losing battle...

*Exclusively or primarily focusing on unconscious bias to tackle racial (& other) inequality thus amounts to structural racism (and sexism, and ableism...)

*Organisations serious about tackling inequality, injustice and discrimination must take a much closer look at the macro context, its relationship to meso and micro processes to take effective action to reduce structural violence and inequality

This is what Beyond Bias aims to deliver. BBT is Race Reflections' FLAGSHIP course. It is the only one day course which is currently offered to organisations outside of our membership structure.

We are certain that it will take your organisation to the next level, when it comes to understanding and tackling inequality, exclusion and discrimination.
BEYONG BIAS CONTENTS
The course will cover;

*Structural and institutional racism

*Intersectionality and intersectional violence

*Micro-meso-macro links (eg. links between unconscious bias, social inequality and organisational practices)

*Historical configurations and present-day institutional arrangements

*Power as a vector of exclusion and marginalisation (again from the micro to the macro)

*Tools, strategies and methods to reduce structural harm including anti-racist tools
FORMAT
This is a full day training course which is interactive, uses various methods and requires participants' reflective and reflexive engagement (with both head and heart).

Beyond Bias, as all courses delivered by Race Reflections is challenging. For this reason, our preference is a face to face delivery. Due to COVID19, we are however not at present delivering face to face training.

We hope to be able to start delivering the course face to face within the next 8-10 weeks.
PRICING
*£3500 for up to 50 attendees (we do not recommend larger groups).
*Price includes delivery and preparation but excludes travel and expenses.
Beyond Bias course may be part of an organisational development membership. For more details, click here.
REGISTER YOUR INTEREST
To arrange an informal conversation about BBT and better understand why it is the natural and necessary progression from your organisational UB training programme, please contact us. We are currently registering interest for face to face delivery in the autumn and winter. Availabilities are limited.

Get in touch, now to book your BBT training and take equality to the next level.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
UNCONSCIOUS BIAS TRAINING Unconscious Bias training (UBT) as the default or preferred method to combat or reduce discrimination and prejudice in the workplace and other institutional settings, is continuing to attract significant criticisms and pushback on methodological, political and ethical grounds. In our opinion, those criticisms are warranted. Valid.

# data[].attributes.body
Survivors’ Network is the Rape Crisis Centre for Sussex, based in Brighton.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
EXIT SITE Skip to content

Blog |

Start your anti-racist journey, or pick up some new tips, with these resources.

We stand in solidarity with our black siblings in the UK, USA & around the world - today, and every day. We recommit to active anti-racism & intersectional feminism as we continue to fight sexual violence & abuse and support survivors. As part of this, and as a majority-white workplace, we believe education is imperative, so our staff team has collated some resources for each other and anyone else who would find it beneficial.

Published: 9th June 2020

Links added: 1st October 2020

We will be keeping this post updated, and will add update dates when we do so. We also have a Padlet with other resources in which is updated by staff, you can find it here.

Jump to a specific section:

We care about your privacy and strive to limit our use of cookies to those that help improve our site and keep it relevant. By continuing to use this site, you agree to the use of cookies. Accept Read More

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Anti-Racism Resources - Survivors Network

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
EXIT SITE Skip to content Blog | Start your anti-racist journey, or pick up some new tips, with these resources. We stand in solidarity with our black siblings in the UK, USA & around the world - today, and every day.

# data[].attributes.body
A space to promote, black business, creatives and liberation within the city. For Us and By Us. ✊🏾

# data[].attributes.headline
Public Petition to: End the Hostile Environment at University of Sussex

# data[].attributes.subject
Public Petition to: End the Hostile Environment at University of Sussex

# data[].attributes.headline
UCU Sussex Anti-Racist Teach-Outs programme

# data[].attributes.subject
UCU Sussex Anti-Racist Teach-Outs programme

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Students' Union stands in solidarity with its Black students and staff.

We understand that the events that have unfolded over the last week are part of a wider and largely unaddressed issue that has been impacting the lives of black people and people of colour for generations: Racism.

While the University of Sussex may stay silent on this issue, we want to assure you that Sussex Students' Union will not. We stand with our Black students and staff at this difficult time and will continue to do so.

We send our heartfelt condolences to the families of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Tony McDade, and the countless others who have been killed in the US and here in the UK. We join those calling for accountability and justice on both sides of the Atlantic, and across the world.

Over the last few years, we have seen the videos of Black people who have lost their lives after interactions with the police. They have lost their lives for working in certain areas whilst being Black, shopping whilst being Black and driving a car whilst being Black. We cannot export this as a US issue.

Often, people in the UK say: "At least here things are not as bad as the US". This is categorically untrue.

According to INQUEST, 1,741 people have died following police contact since 1990; and the Runnymede Trust has found no police officer has been convicted for a Black person's death since 1995. In the midst of a pandemic that has disproportionately impacted Black communities in the UK, we have seen the heartbreaking cases of those on the frontline continuing to face racism, which has led to tragic consequences - such as Belly Mujinga and Trevor Belle.

We also cannot forget the Windrush Generation and Grenfell Tower, and the very fact that Brexit was created on an anti-immigration and racist ideal from toxic colonialism and nationalism.

Universities are not spaces of neutrality and have been spaces of revolutionary thought in years past. Many movements including anti-war and anti-apartheid movements gained tractions on University campuses across the world before embedding themselves into mainstream society.

That is why we must speak out now. Being at university should never be apolitical when our very existence is political.

To our white and non-black students and staff: If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem. Your silence is complicit.

Racism is the status quo of our society. If you care about your black friends, peers and colleagues you should be angry, you should be vocal, you should stand with us too.

Educate yourselves on the prejudices and injustices of the world against Black people using the wealth of resources that are freely available to you. Take the time to educate yourself on how racism works, acknowledge the privilege you have as a white person or a non-black person within our society and commit to solidarity and change.

It should not be the responsibility of the Black community to educate you and you should not expect them to, especially at a time when they are experiencing immeasurable grief.

Systemic change needs action from all races and it needs to happen now.

Black Lives Matter.

Credits: We would like to credit and thank Meena Zaveri (SU), Nehaal Bajwa & Caitlin Ung (Decolonise Sussex), Sussex BAME Society and other BAME students who helped to put this statement together.

Good resources to refer to:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Black Lives Matter | We stand in solidarity with our Black students and staff

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Students' Union stands in solidarity with its Black students and staff. We understand that the events that have unfolded over the last week are part of a wider and largely unaddressed issue that has been impacting the lives of black people and people of colour for generations: Racism.

# data[].attributes.headline
We will support and further the demands made of UEG by USSU

# data[].attributes.subject
We will support and further the demands made of UEG by USSU

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Today we met with the University Executive team and discussed the University's Black Lives Matter statement and the need for urgent anti-racist action going forward.

We brought with us three students who raised excellent points and shared their lived experience throughout this period and more generally as Black students at Sussex.

To summarise, this included issues around racist structures, lack of cultural competency, virtue signalling, lack of diversity amongst staff, the Sussex Awarding Gap, microaggressions towards Black/BAME students and staff in everyday life at Sussex and other incredibly pertinent and painful truths that the University needs to understand.

We asked for the following:

That the UEG (University Executive Group) enrols in the full two-day Race Equality Charter training - we went on this and it was impactful and helped us learn more about race equality and how to engage in anti-racist action.

More funding for the BAME Ambassador Scheme and thus a longer time commitment to the scheme (We currently only have funding for six months - as of September).

And for a general explanation regarding the statements released by the University.

We received commitments from the Vice Chancellor (VC) around the following issues:

The VC committed to making sure that all members of the University leadership team engage in Race Equality Charter training (this will include Heads of Schools and Heads of Professional services).

That increased funding for the BAME Ambassador scheme would be taken and seriously considered. We will wait and see on this one. However we were adamant that if the University was to continue to highlight their good practice through there being an Ambassador scheme, they would need to commit to it properly.

The VC also explained that he had underestimated the situation in the United States and did not realise, until too late, that the protests were just as pertinent in the UK, and apologised for the original statements, taking responsibility for them. He also reiterated his commitment to the most recent statement on Saturday 6 June.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Officer Statement | The University and Black Lives Matter

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Today we met with the University Executive team and discussed the University's Black Lives Matter statement and the need for urgent anti-racist action going forward. We brought with us three students who raised excellent points and shared their lived experience throughout this period and more generally as Black students at Sussex.

# data[].attributes.headline
University of Sussex Ethnicity Pay Gap Report 2020

# data[].attributes.subject
University of Sussex Ethnicity Pay Gap Report 2020

# data[].attributes.headline
The BAME attainment gap is not the fault of BAME students

# data[].attributes.subject
The BAME attainment gap is not the fault of BAME students

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It is difficult to be in UK higher education and be unaware of the black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) attainment gap. There have been numerous studies conducted, reports written and interventions trialled, yet it feels as though we are still decades away from closing it.

Many people still deny institutional responsibility, clinging to the "deficit model" that puts the blame squarely on BAME students' perceived lower entry grades and poorer socio-economic circumstances. Thankfully, this is now widely recognised as false. Data from the Higher Education Statistics Agency and the Office for Students show that the gap exists even when grades and wealth are controlled for.

Only 7 per cent of students surveyed by the National Union of Students and Universities UK for their May report, Closing the Gap, attest that their university has discussed the attainment gap with the student body. Yet the report also highlights that some institutions have developed what they perceive to be appropriate interventions. These range from the "History Makers" touring exhibition, which celebrated black graduates of the University of Cambridge, to the University of Manchester 's focus on the "creation of safe spaces, where students and staff can engage in open dialogue on inclusive learning and teaching environments, academic support and well-being".

While these interventions will undoubtedly have some positive effect, I fear that real progress eludes us because the onus is still placed on BAME students to work harder. They are often asked to spend hours in focus groups reliving traumatic experiences, or to attend extra sessions to help academics "decolonise" their curriculum. This raises an important question. Since we know that BAME students are not the problem, why are we asking them to do most of the work in solving it?

In my view, the sector is still not ready to face up to the real cause: whiteness. By that term, I mean the observable reality that UK higher education is set up to see a white population as the norm and everyone else as an added extra, who should either fit in or face restrictions on their attainment or progression.

If you don't believe me, look up your university's leadership or google how many black professors it has. It is also important to remember that British academia has spearheaded several of the most dangerous rhetorical positions on race. An example is eugenics, assumed to have been consigned to a darker past until we learned that a secret eugenics conference was held on the UCL campus in 2017.

The facts are:

The BAME attainment gap exists

Out of 19,000 UK professors, less than 100 are black or mixed-race (of whom only 27 are women)

BAME academics are paid less than their white counterparts

BAME academics report feeling blocked from senior positions

Only 1.2 per cent of the nearly 20,000 funded PhD studentships awarded by the UK research councils between 2016 and 2018 were awarded to black or mixed-race students.

These are not isolated phenomena. They are symptoms of whiteness, and the cure must be systematic change to universities' approach to both teaching and non-academic services. In my opinion, the most effective interventions suggested in the Closing the Gap report are those that change systems directly, rather than solely relying on labour-intensive collaboration from BAME students.

The approach pioneered by Kingston University has been so effective that several other institutions have followed suit. It transforms the way that attainment gap data are analysed, basing them on BAME students' academic potential, rather than their proximity to white attainment. The University of the Arts London 's "academic enhancement model" has also been effective. The university's planning department and executive board collaboratively set and monitor cross-university standards using a variety of metrics, while offering support to courses that fall behind. The model contributed to a 4.9 per cent reduction in the university's BAME attainment gap in 2018.

Surveys often find that BAME students are less likely to access support services. The reason is obvious to me: the services are not suitable for BAME students because cultural competencies are rarely considered when recruiting staff. Particularly in non-academic positions, cultural understanding must be seen as an asset; you cannot serve a diverse student population without a representative workforce.

My own university, Sussex, is far from alone in only just beginning its journey to close the attainment gap. Here, too, it is of paramount importance that we realise what the real issue and cause is; mining BAME students (often unpaid) for solutions to an institutional problem will only further exacerbate the differences in their university experiences.

While student collaboration is definitely important, universities must look in the mirror and address the perpetuation of whiteness as normality. They must make it an active priority to hire BAME staff in a systematic way that avoids tokenism. It is no longer enough to hold up a handful of BAME success stories as a shield from criticism.

Virtually every UK university claims to cherish equality, inclusion and fairness. Now is the time to prove it, with real investment to heal a self-inflicted wound.
This article was originally written by Daniel Akinbosede for Times Higher Education.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The BAME attainment gap is not the fault of BAME students

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It is difficult to be in UK higher education and be unaware of the black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) attainment gap. There have been numerous studies conducted, reports written and interventions trialled, yet it feels as though we are still decades away from closing it.

# data[].attributes.body
To find out more or get involved, email ucusussexantiracism@gmail.com

# data[].attributes.headline
Example demands from Concordia University

# data[].attributes.subject
Example demands from Concordia University

# data[].attributes.headline
BAMEed COVID-19: guidance for Black, Asian and minority ethnic staff and their employers in school settings

# data[].attributes.subject
BAMEed COVID-19: guidance for Black, Asian and minority ethnic staff and their employers in school settings

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
At D&A we talk about disabling experiences, situations and attitudes. The term "disabled people" is important for political reasons, to address the inherent barriers that many people face. But we aspire to reach a point where our society is so inclusive that the label becomes less relevant, as we believe disablement is often contextual. Environments can be disabling; a person in a wheelchair might consider themselves disabled in front of a flight of stairs, but not necessarily in front of a lift. The social model shows us that we can be inclusive by making our world accessible to the needs of everyone if we want to. Disablement can be considered a social construct.
Let's talk about racism.
If you apply the same line of thought to a person of colour living in a racist world, they are also "disabled" by the daily struggles of fighting against racism and systems that weren't built with them in mind. There are structural inequalities that run deep, from the whitewashing of history lessons in schools to the disproportionate stop and search rates of black people. Simple things like going for a walk around your community, bird watching or even just sleeping peacefully in your own home ought to be a steadfast right. But it's not. This world is currently disabling for people of colour.

Disablement comes in many shapes, colours, genders and beliefs, often crossing over to magnify marginalisation. At D&A we always have, and always will, champion diversity and listen closely to each person's individual experience. We know that people experience disability differently, that people are complex and have layered identities that intersect. Black disabled people often face a double burden of being systematically undermined and overlooked.

We stand with you: paving the way for a future where everyone is welcomed and included

D&A's CEO, Atif Choudhury, grew up in Thamesmead in the 1980's with his Bengali parents, which at the time was the largest council estate in Europe. No stranger to racism, he wrote an open letter to express his solidarity with those that have had enough.

" With a personal need to express solidarity to all those globally participating in the resistance, I am writing in the hope that we can all safeguard ourselves a little by reaching out to each other and indeed staying responsive to our own fears and hopes. Offering strength for friends, family members, and just as importantly, our learners, many of whom will be feeling the challenges of this moment and the sad resignation that this moment has gone on for over 400 years.
However hard it can be to push ourselves into action; state compliance and apathy disguised as empathy is all too often normalised. It is not enough to not be racist, we must look to decide upon actions that strike down systems and challenge us as overtly anti-racist. Speaking perhaps from my own experiences in the UK, being reminded of childhood racism as a constant; the masking, the grace and the perseverance needed to not let it cut so deep. I've come like so many, to own this issue and carry better hopes for my children, yet I remain surprised when presented by political indifference. Nevertheless, as an organisation, I'm proud that we can do more; be more and insist on change. Committed to inclusion, D&A has never allowed silence to be its mother tongue. Indeed structurally, socially and authentically, our position to address the imbalances of inequality remain global in its intent.
Yet despite such heartfelt values, the reality of watching the US events unfold from afar is meaningless when it all too often happens in the UK too. I hope for many to acknowledge this and globally see a change that ensures we all hear the stifled voices that struggle to be heard, and even breathe. "

"Until then, it remains painful to watch and ever more dehumanising to ignore"

Resources

Below is a list of resources to support black voices and to get educated. White supremacy infects every area of our lives, it needs to be recognised, unlearned and dismantled. We need to challenge racism by speaking up, deepening knowledge, skilling up, funding and defunding services, attacking complicity, calling it out, getting uncomfortable and rebuilding with respect.

Donate: UK orgs

Donate: US orgs

UK Articles

Racist history of the police in UK and US

Know your rights/ guidance to deal with police

Books

Assata - Assata Shakur

Why I'm No Longer Talking to White People About Race - Reni Eddo-Lodge

Me and White Supremacy - Layla F. Saad

All About Love - Bell Hooks

The Fire Next Time - James Baldwin

Sister Outsider - Audre Lorde

Are Prisons Obsolete? - Angela Y. Davis

A Taste of Power: A Black Woman's Story - Elaine Brown

I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings - Maya Angelou

Support online/ follow/ pay

Educational tools - Social Media

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
We revolt simply because, for many reasons, we can no longer breathe | D&A | Diversity and Ability

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
At D&A we talk about disabling experiences, situations and attitudes. The term "disabled people" is important for political reasons, to address the inherent barriers that many people face. But we aspire to reach a point where our society is so inclusive that the label becomes less relevant, as we believe...

# data[].attributes.headline
Accomplices Not Allies: Abolishing the Ally Industrial Complex

# data[].attributes.subject
Accomplices Not Allies: Abolishing the Ally Industrial Complex

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Printable version available here. (PDF | 3.3MB)
Print friendly cover w/corrections here. (PDF | 3.2MB)

This provocation is intended to intervene in some of the current tensions around solidarity/support work as the current trajectories are counter-liberatory from my perspective. Special thanks to DS in Phoenix for convos that lead to this 'zine and all those who provided comments/questions/disagreements. Don't construe this as being for "white young middle class allies", just for paid activists, non-profits, or as a friend said, "downwardly-mobile anarchists or students." There are many so-called "allies" in the migrant rights struggle who support "comprehensive immigration reform" which furthers militarization of Indigenous lands.

The ally industrial complex has been established by activists whose careers depend on the "issues" they work to address. These nonprofit capitalists advance their careers off the struggles they ostensibly support. They often work in the guise of "grassroots" or "community-based" and are not necessarily tied to any organization.
They build organizational or individual capacity and power, establishing themselves comfortably among the top ranks in their hierarchy of oppression as they strive to become the ally "champions" of the most oppressed. While the exploitation of solidarity and support is nothing new, the commodification and exploitation of allyship is a growing trend in the activism industry.

Anyone who concerns themselves with anti-oppression struggles and collective liberation has at some point either participated in workshops, read 'zines, or been parts of deep discussions on how to be a "good" ally. You can now pay hundreds of dollars to go to esoteric institutes for an allyship certificate in anti-oppression. You can go through workshops and receive an allyship badge. In order to commodify struggle it must first be objectified. This is exhibited in how "issues" are "framed" & "branded." Where struggle is commodity, allyship is currency.
Ally has also become an identity, disembodied from any real mutual understanding of support.
The term ally has been rendered ineffective and meaningless.
Accomplices not allies.

ac·com·plice noun:
accomplice; plural noun: accomplices
a person who helps another commit a crime.

There exists a fiercely unrelenting desire to achieve total liberation, with the land and, together.
At some point there is a "we", and we most likely will have to work together. This means, at the least, formulating mutual understandings that are not entirely antagonistic, otherwise we may find ourselves, our desires, and our struggles, to be incompatible.
There are certain understandings that may not be negotiable. There are contradictions that we must come to terms with and certainly we will do this on our own terms.
But we need to know who has our backs, or more appropriately: who is with us, at our sides?

The risks of an ally who provides support or solidarity (usually on a temporary basis) in a fight are much different than that of an accomplice. When we fight back or forward, together, becoming complicit in a struggle towards liberation, we are accomplices. Abolishing allyship can occur through the criminalization of support and solidarity.

While the strategies and tactics of asserting (or abolishing depending on your view) social power and political power may be diverse, there are some hard lessons that could bear not replicating.
Consider the following to be a guide for identifying points of intervention against the ally industrial complex.

"Salvation aka Missionary Work & Self Therapy"
Allies all too often carry romantic notions of oppressed folks they wish to "help." These are the ally "saviors" who see victims and tokens instead of people.
This victimization becomes a fetish for the worst of the allies in forms of exotification, manarchism, 'splaining, POC sexploitation, etc. This kind of relationship generally fosters exploitation between both the oppressed and oppressor. The ally and the allied-with become entangled in an abusive relationship. Generally neither can see it until it's too late. This relationship can also digress into co-dependency which means they have robbed each other of their own power. Ally "saviors" have a tendency to create dependency on them and their function as support. No one is here to be saved, we don't need "missionary allies" or pity.
Guilt is also a primary ally motivating factor. Even if never admitted, guilt & shame generally function as motivators in the consciousness of an oppressor who realizes that they are operating on the wrong side. While guilt and shame are very powerful emotions, think about what you're doing before you make another community's struggle into your therapy session. Of course, acts of resistance and liberation can be healing, but tackling guilt, shame, and other trauma require a much different focus, or at least an explicit and consensual focus. What kind of relationships are built on guilt and shame?

"Exploitation & Co-optation"
Those who co-opt are only there to advance self interests (usually it's either notoriety or financial). As these "allies" seek to impose their agenda, they out themselves. The 'radical' more militant-than-thou "grassroots" organizers are keen on seeking out "sexy" issues to co-opt (for notoriety/ego/super ally/most radical ally) and they set the terms of engagement or dictate what struggles get amplified or marginalized irregardless of whose homelands they're operating on. The nonprofit establishment or non-profit industrial complex (NPIC) also seeks out "sexy" or "fundable" issues to co-opt and exploit as these are ripe for the grant funding that they covet. Too often, Indigenous liberation struggles for life and land, by nature, directly confront the entire framework to which this colonial & capitalist society is based on. This is threatening to potential capitalist funders so some groups are forced to compromise radical or liberatory work for funding, others become alienated and further invisibilized or subordinated to tokenism. Co-opters most often show up to the fight when the battle has already escalated and it's a little too late.
These entities almost always propose trainings, workshops, action camps, and offer other specialized expertise in acts of patronization. These folks are generally paid huge salaries for their "professional" activism, get over-inflated grants for logistics and "organizational capacity building", and struggles may become further exploited as "poster struggles" for their funders. Additionally, these skills most likely already exist within the communities or they are tendencies that need only be provoked into action.
These aren't just dynamics practiced by large so-called non-governmental organizations (NGOs), individuals are adept at this self-serving tactic as well.
Co-optation also functions as a form of liberalism. Allyship can perpetuate a neutralizing dynamic by co-opting original liberatory intent into a reformist agenda.
Certain folks in the struggles (usually movement "personalities") who don't upset the ally establishment status quo can be rewarded with inclusion in the ally industry.

"Self proclaiming/confessional Allies"
All too often folks show up with an, "I am here to support you!" attitude that they wear like a badge. Ultimately making struggles out to feel like an extracurricular activity that they are getting "ally points" for. Self-asserted allies may even have anti-oppression principles and values as window dressing. Perhaps you've seen this quote by Lilla Watson on their materials: "If you come here to help me, you're wasting your time. If you come because your liberation is bound up with mine, then let us work together." They are keen to posture, but their actions are inconsistent with their assertions.
Meaningful alliances aren't imposed, they are consented upon. The self-proclaimed allies have no intention to abolish the entitlement that compelled them to impose their relationship upon those they claim to ally with.

"Parachuters"
Parachuters rush to the front lines seemingly from out-of-nowhere. They literally move from one hot or sexy spot to the next. They also fall under the "savior" & "self-proclaimed" categories as they mostly come from specialized institutes, organizations, & think-tanks. They've been through the trainings, workshops, lectures, etc., they are the "experts" so they know "what is best." This paternalistic attitude is implicit in the structures (non-profits, institutes, etc) these "allies" derive their awareness of the "issues" from. Even if they reject their own non-profit programming, they are ultimately reactionary, entitled, and patronizing, or positioning with power-over, those they proclaim allyship with. It's structural patronization that is rooted in the same dominion of hetero-patriarchal white supremacy.
Parachuters are usually missionaries with more funding.

"Academics, & Intellectuals"
Although sometimes directly from communities in struggle, intellectuals and academics also fit neatly in all of these categories. Their role in struggle can be extremely patronizing. In many cases the academic maintains institutional power above the knowledge and skill base of the community/ies in struggle. Intellectuals are most often fixated on un-learning oppression. These lot generally don't have their feet on the ground, but are quick to be critical of those who do.
Should we desire to merely "unlearn" oppression, or to smash it to fucking pieces, and have it's very existence gone?
An accomplice as academic would seek ways to leverage resources and material support and/or betray their institution to further liberation struggles. An intellectual accomplice would strategize with, not for and not be afraid to pick up a hammer.

"Gatekeepers"
Gatekeepers seek power over, not with, others. They are known for the tactics of controlling and/or withholding information, resources, connections, support, etc. Gatekeepers come from the outside and from within. When exposed they are usually rendered ineffective (so long as there are effective accountability/responsibility mechanisms).
Gatekeeping individuals and organizations, like "savior allies," also have tendency to create dependency on them and their function as support. They have a tendency to dominate or control.

"Navigators & Floaters"
The "navigating" ally is someone who is familiar or skilled in jargon and maneuvers through spaces or struggles yet doesn't have meaningful dialogue (by avoiding debates or remaining silent) or take meaningful action beyond their personal comfort zones (this exists with entire organizations too). They uphold their power and, by extension, the dominant power structures by not directly attacking them.
"Ally" here is more clearly defined as the act of making personal projects out of other folk's oppression. These are lifestyle allies who act like passively participating or simply using the right terminology is support. When shit goes down they are the first to bail. They don't stick around to take responsibility for their behavior. When confronted they often blame others and attempt to dismiss or delegitimize concerns.
Accomplices aren't afraid to engage in uncomfortable/unsettling/challenging debates or discussions.

Floaters are "allies" that hop from group to group and issue to issue, never being committed enough but always wanting their presence felt and their voices heard. They tend to disappear when it comes down to being held accountable or taking responsibility for fucked up behavior.
Floaters are folks you can trust to tell the cops to "fuck off" but never engage in mutual risk, constantly put others at risk, are quick to be authoritarian about other peoples over stepping privileges, but never check their own. They basically are action junkie tourists who never want to be part of paying the price, the planning, or the responsibility but always want to be held up as worthy of being respected for "having been there" when a rock needed throwing, bloc needs forming, etc.
This dynamic is also important to be aware of for threats of infiltration. Provocateurs are notorious floaters going from place to place never being accountable to their words or actions. Infiltration doesn't necessarily have to come from the state, the same impacts can occur by "well meaning" allies. It's important to note that calling out infiltrators bears serious implications and shouldn't be attempted without concrete evidence.
"Acts of Resignation"
Resignation of agency is a by-product of the allyship establishment. At first the dynamic may not seem problematic, after all, why would it be an issue with those who benefit from systems of oppression to reject or distance themselves from those benefits and behaviors (like entitlement, etc) that accompany them? In the worst cases, "allies" themselves act paralyzed believing it's their duty as a "good ally." There is a difference between acting for others, with others, and for one's own interests, be explicit.
You wouldn't find an accomplice resigning their agency, or capabilities as an act of "support." They would find creative ways to weaponize their privilege (or more clearly, their rewards of being part of an oppressor class) as an expression of social war. Otherwise we end up with a bunch of anti-civ/primitivist appropriators or anarcho-hipsters, when saboteurs would be preferred.

Suggestions for some ways forward for anti-colonial accomplices:

Allyship is the corruption of radical spirit and imagination, it's the dead end of decolonization.
The ally establishment co-opts decolonization as a banner to fly at its unending anti-oppression gala. What is not understood is that decolonization is a threat to the very existence of settler "allies." No matter how liberated you are, if you are still occupying Indigenous lands you are still a colonizer.

Decolonization (the process of restoring Indigenous identity) can be very personal and should be differentiated, though not disconnected, from anti-colonial struggle.
The work of an accomplice in anti-colonial struggle is to attack colonial structures & ideas.

The starting point is to articulate your relationship to Indigenous Peoples whose lands you are occupying. This is beyond acknowledgment or recognition. This can be particularly challenging for "non-federally recognized" Indigenous Peoples as they are invisiblized by the state and by the invaders occupying their homelands.
It may take time to establish lines of communication especially as some folks may have already been burnt by outsiders. If you do not know where or how to contact folks, do some ground work, research (but don't rely on anthropological sources, they are euro-centric), and pay attention. Try to more listening than speaking and planning.
In long-term struggles communication may be ruptured between various factions, there are no easy ways to address this. Don't try to work the situation out, but communicate openly with consideration of the points below.
Sometimes other Indigenous Peoples are "guests" on other's homelands yet are tokenized as the Indigenous representatives for the "local struggles". This dynamic also perpetuates settler colonialism. A lot of people also assume Indigenous folks are all on the same page "politically," we're definitely not.

While there may be times folks have the capacity and patience to do so, be aware of the dynamics perpetuated by hand-holding. Accomplices are realized through mutual consent and build trust. They don't just have our backs, they are at our side, or in their own spaces confronting and unsettling colonialism.
Understand that it is not our responsibility to hold your hand through a process to be an accomplice.
Accomplices listen with respect for the range of cultural practices and dynamics that exists within various Indigenous communities.
Accomplices aren't motivated by personal guilt or shame, they may have their own agenda but they are explicit.
As accomplices we are compelled to become accountable and responsible to each other, that is the nature of trust.

Don't wait around for anyone to proclaim you to be an accomplice, you certainly cannot proclaim it yourself. You just are or you are not. The lines of oppression are already drawn. Direct action is really the best and may be the only way to learn what it is to be an accomplice. We're in a fight, so be ready for confrontation and consequence.

If you are wondering whether to get involved with or to support an organization:

Be suspect of anyone and any organization who professes allyship, decolonization work, and/or wears their relationships with Indigenous Peoples as at badge.

Use some of the points above to determine primary motives.
Look at the organizations funding. Who is getting paid? How are they transparent? Who's defining the terms? Who sets the agenda? Do campaigns align with what the needs are on the ground?

Are there local grassroots Indigenous People directly involved with the decision making?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Accomplices Not Allies: Abolishing the Ally Industrial Complex

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
An Indigenous perspective & provocation. Printable version available here. (PDF | 3.3MB) Print friendly cover w/corrections here. (PDF | 3.2MB) This provocation is intended to intervene in some of the current tensions around solidarity/support work as the current trajectories are counter-liberat

# data[].attributes.headline
Building a police-free future: frequently asked questions

# data[].attributes.subject
Building a police-free future: frequently asked questions

# data[].attributes.body
US zine presented by MPD150, an independent, community-based initiative challenging the narrative that police exist to protect and serve.

# data[].attributes.headline
Bearing witness to the history of black lives in Britain

# data[].attributes.subject
Bearing witness to the history of black lives in Britain

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Black Lives Matter protest in Leicester, UK. Kennetta Hammond Perry, Author provided

In the face of the coronavirus pandemic that has disproportionately affected black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) communities, people across the globe have taken to the streets in protest. They have gathered in solidarity to express anger about George Floyd's death and the persistence of police violence.

They are also calling out systemic racial injustices present in healthcare, education and public policy. This necessitates reasserting basic claims for the recognition of black humanity through the rallying cry "Black Lives Matter."

But rather than looking across the Atlantic to understand why "Black Lives Matter" resonates so deeply in Britain, we need to first confront the repressed and disavowed histories of black life in the UK. These histories are all too often absent from the popular historical imagination of the nation. Yet, they frame the much-needed historical context for thinking through what we are bearing witness to in the present.

Untold histories

Community and political organising rooted in affirming the value of black life - work that is ever-present, but often overlooked - has gained increased visibility in recent weeks. As part of these organising efforts, there have been been renewed calls to reconstruct and reinterpret the built environment. We have seen this in the culmination of longstanding campaigns to remove the statues of slave owners Edward Colston and Robert Milligan.

Public debate has focused on whether or not such acts represent an attempt to erase aspects of British history. But at the heart of this discussion is an ongoing struggle to rethink accepted historical narratives and make visible the political work of the history.

History is being made in this moment. Previously revered narratives of Britain's past are being questioned and omitted histories that need to be known are being told. These are the rich and complex stories of black life in Britain. Such histories are well-known within black communities, yet continue to be strategically silenced in our public understanding of British history.

There has been media coverage of the political solidarities that have long existed between anti-racist movements in the UK and US. However, we must consider why British students learn of Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech, but not the march to the US embassy in London organised by Claudia Jones in solidarity with the 1963 March on Washington.

This march mobilised people in protest against the UK's Commonwealth Immigration Act of 1962. Jones likened this policy to apartheid in the ways it created racialised barriers of entry for what was, at the time, a largely non-white migration of Commonwealth citizens to Britain.

The act established deportation procedures for British citizens born in the Commonwealth and empowered landlords to deny tenancies to those suspected of unlawful entry. Jones presciently understood how the 1962 act would lay the groundwork for today's hostile anti-immigrant environment, which led to the Windrush Scandal.

We must ask why people learn of Rosa Parks through Dr Who but not the Bristol Bus Boycott or the bussing of black and Asian students in the 1960s and 1970s? This was done in places such as Bradford and Leicester to maintain majority white student populations. It highlights how race informed access to public education.

We must scrutinise why the collective British historical memory makes room for Stephen Lawrence while dispensing of Kelso Cochrane, David Oluwale, Aseta Simms, Joy Gardner and Christopher Adler. These names point to a history of state violence that informs how black communities in Britain are making sense of George Floyd's murder.

We must interrogate how these histories - and those which define the history of race and racism in America - are routinely and deliberately severed from an understanding of the legacies of British imperialism.

Challenging myths of Britain's past

We must ask these questions while also striving to understand why these circumstances persist. This demands embracing curriculum transformation coupled with teacher education. It also requires taking targeted action to redress the dismal numbers of black academics in history departments in UK universities. Moreover, it involves recognising the legitimacy of black British history as a field of inquiry.

In my book, London is the Place for Me, I explore the history of what I describe as the "mystique of British anti-racism". I use this concept to chart the constellation of narrative myths about Britain. These are popular narratives that present Britain as tolerant, liberal, progressive, inclusive, humanitarian, benevolent and seemingly anti-racist.

John Gomez/Shutterstock

The mystique of British anti-racism depends upon a wilful denial of the place of race and racism in British society. It is rooted in the politicisation of self-congratulatory historical narratives of British abolitionism.

Such narratives centre white reformers as enlightened saviours while whitewashing the violence of enslavement and the resistance of the enslaved. They traffic in the idea that anti-Black racism is something foreign. They insist that racism is the fault of a " small minority ", as the home secretary, Priti Patel, recently stated. They also maintains that racism operates on a spectrum of "better" or "worse" in comparison to other places. In all of these scenarios, the realities of those affected by racism are discounted or ignored.

Consequently, the mystique of British anti-racism is itself a dangerous and distorting set of narratives of British history that render black life as inessential and or inconsequential. This has the effect of becoming complicit in gaslighting or invalidating black people's experiences of racism.

It is the " power in the telling " of histories of black life that allow us to challenge the mystique of British anti-racism. It allows us to bear witness to the insidious ways in which racism operates. It also provides much-needed perspectives of how black people have ingeniously and creatively devised strategies for living, surviving, resisting, anticipating and remaking conditions designed to devalue or disregard them.

This is why making black lives matter in British history is critical anti-racist work. It is an urgent agenda for the present that requires rethinking what we know about the past.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bearing witness to the history of black lives in Britain

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the face of the coronavirus pandemic that has disproportionately affected black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) communities, people across the globe have taken to the streets in protest. They have gathered in solidarity to express anger about George Floyd's death and the persistence of police violence.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The University's staff survey steering group are coordinating and leading institution-wide actions in response to the results of the most recent staff survey in November 2018. See a summary of the institutional Staff Survey Action Plan.

For example, to address bullying and harassment an institutional action group is overseeing the introduction of a new Dignity and Respect policy. The policy includes a raft of proactive actions including an expanded training programme and other interventions such as the introduction of Dignity Champions across the University.

Other actions focus on ensuring staff feel safe to speak up and feel valued, on enhancing collaboration between staff, and on providing the most effective leadership.

A wide range of new initiatives that have been introduced will also make a real difference to the ways in which we work and the opportunities that staff have access to. These include ' Flexible Sussex', a new mentoring scheme, new training and development opportunities, and welfare and staff discount schemes.

In addition to these changes, each Head of School and Divisional Director has responsibility for their own local staff survey action plans. We will be following up on the main themes arising from the survey with staff focus groups, which will enable us to better understand the specific issues and concerns, thereby tailoring our responses in order to improve.

We have plans to conduct staff surveys more frequently so we can keep a much closer tab on the progress we are making. The next one is planned for summer 2020.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The University's staff survey steering group are coordinating and leading institution-wide actions in response to the results of the most recent staff survey in November 2018. See a summary of the institutional Staff Survey Action Plan. For example, to address bullying and harassment an institutional action group is overseeing the introduction of a new Dignity and Respect policy.

# data[].attributes.headline
UCU National resources for building an Anti-Racist workplace

# data[].attributes.subject
UCU National resources for building an Anti-Racist workplace

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
'...but where are you REALLY from?'

'...although it seems very minor, consistent and persistent misspelling of my name. If you can learn Dostoyevsky...'

The sixth week of action against workplace racism will be held from the week beginning Monday 22 February 2021. This annual campaign event has grown from strength to strength as it involves a whole union approach in tackling the issues of workplace racism and its impact on careers, mental health and well-being and relationships with peers/students.

The theme of this year's week of action is community accountability: a n antiracism for abolitionist times. What is the role education institutions play in perpetuating racism? Community accountability seeks to transform education from a system of state racism to education as a community resource. The community accountability outline and guidance documents can be found here:

The UCU black members' standing committee initiative is designed to assist members and branches who wish to map out an organising plan to create a process of ongoing community accountability. To find out more catch up on our keynote webinar below.

Building an anti-racist environment

This annual campaign event has grown from strength to strength as it involves a whole union approach in tackling the issues of workplace racism and its impact on careers, mental health and well-being and relationships with peers/students. Racist incidents are on the rise across the country and UCU needs to be at the forefront of challenging and pushing back on workplace racism.

Films are available below featuring members of UCU's Black Members' Standing Committee discussing approaches to tackling discrimination. The films can be used in a variety of ways. We have found they are a useful resource to show during a lunchtime meeting allowing plenty of time for follow-up discussions and goal setting.

Branch are encouraged to engage with members, colleagues and the wider institution by hosting events looking at least one of the following areas:

1. Barriers to progression

Week of action 2020: barriers to progression poster [134kb]

2. Race pay gap

Week of action 2020: race pay gap poster [34kb]

3. Decolonising education

Week of action 2020: decolonising education poster [301kb]

4. Hostile environment

Week of action 2020: hostile environment poster [329kb]

Please let us know what you have planned for your week of action.

Suggested activities and other resources

Below are some other resources and suggestions you may want to use to stimulate discussion among members and students.

1. Watch our 'witness' campaign film in which UCU black members speak candidly about their experiences of everyday racism and its impact.

2. Host a meeting to discuss what and how branches can challenge and change perceptions including working with other equality groups to ensure that workplace racism is challenged on an intersectional basis.

3. Use our survey findings from our most recent report ' Staying Power [1mb]' (2019) and our initial 'witness' report [132kb] (2016).

4. Involve black staff to share their experiences of everyday racism in the workplace - devise an action plan of how branches can work toward addressing the issues raised.

5. Share the witness document [824kb] capturing some of the experiences of UCU black members.

6. Use our bargaining guide on tackling workplace racism [343kb] to raise the issues identified with employers as an integral part of the collective bargaining agenda.

7. Submit an article for the 'Black Voices' blog: https://www.ucu.org.uk/black-voices. Please send contributions to Chris Nicholas (cnicholas@ucu.org.uk).

8. Use our posters:
Challenging workplace racism - poster 1 [56kb]
Challenging workplace racism - poster 2 [51kb]
UCU: challenging workplace racism - leaflet [254kb]
If you would like hard copies of the posters please contact Martin Whelton .

Branches are also encouraged to raise awareness of the issues raised in the following videos and we have suggested a number of activities [239kb] for the week to encourage discussion and actions to help further engage members in seeking solutions:

Bullying and stereotyping blocking professorial path for black women

A February 2019 report for UCU says a culture of bullying and stereotyping means black academics have to work harder and employ mentally draining strategies to try and get on.

UCU survey

The survey of 631 black union members working in post-16 education found that:

over two-thirds (71%) said they had 'often' or 'sometimes' been subject to bullying and harassment from managers

nine out of ten (90%) black staff members report having faced barriers to promotion in colleges and universities.

UCU report finds high levels of discrimination
The experiences of black and minority ethnic staff in further and higher education, Feb 16 [132kb]

The qualitative data from the survey into experiences of UCU's black members can be found here:

Witness - voice of UCU black members, Feb 17 [824kb]
Witness - voice of UCU black members, Feb 17 [277kb]

'Witness'

Initiated by UCU Black Members' Standing Committee, our new film 'witness' chronicles the lived experiences of UCU black members in post-16 education.

'witness' film: worksheet [146kb]
'witness' film: what next? [146kb]
'witness' film: questions [142kb]

To view the subtitled version please click here.

You can also watch a quick preview of some of the issues raised in the film:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
UCU week of action against workplace racism

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
'...but where are you REALLY from?' '...although it seems very minor, consistent and persistent misspelling of my name. If you can learn Dostoyevsky...' The sixth week of action against workplace racism will be held from the week beginning Monday 22 February 2021.

# data[].attributes.body
Highlights challenges to staff and students and how we can create an inclusive culture through change and allies.

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.text
Race #Equality and #Diversity in Academia. 

A collection of the posters I have made in the last month. Highlights challenges to staff and students and how we can create an inclusive culture through change and allies.

#AcademicTwitter #AcademicChatter #phdchat #HigherEducation

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.original_text
Race #Equality and #Diversity in Academia. 

A collection of the posters I have made in the last month. Highlights challenges to staff and students and how we can create an inclusive culture through change and allies.

#AcademicTwitter #AcademicChatter #phdchat #HigherEducation https://t.co/GJU7Z4t66C

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.embed_code
Race #Equality and #Diversity in Academia.

A collection of the posters I have made in the last month. Highlights challenges to staff and students and how we can create an inclusive culture through change and allies.#AcademicTwitter #AcademicChatter #phdchat #HigherEducation pic.twitter.com/GJU7Z4t66C
— Bhavik Anil Patel | ભાવિક અનિલ પટેલ (@BhavikAnilPatel) July 7, 2020

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props_source.data.text
Race #Equality and #Diversity in Academia. 

A collection of the posters I have made in the last month. Highlights challenges to staff and students and how we can create an inclusive culture through change and allies.

#AcademicTwitter #AcademicChatter #phdchat #HigherEducation https://t.co/GJU7Z4t66C

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.original_text
Race #Equality and #Diversity in Academia. 

A collection of the posters I have made in the last month. Highlights challenges to staff and students and how we can create an inclusive culture through change and allies.

#AcademicTwitter #AcademicChatter #phdchat #HigherEducation https://t.co/GJU7Z4t66C

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.text
Race #Equality and #Diversity in Academia. 

A collection of the posters I have made in the last month. Highlights challenges to staff and students and how we can create an inclusive culture through change and allies.

#AcademicTwitter #AcademicChatter #phdchat #HigherEducation

# data[].attributes.headline
Leading Routes report: The Broken Pipeline – Barriers to Black PhD Students Accessing Research Council Funding

# data[].attributes.subject
Leading Routes report: The Broken Pipeline – Barriers to Black PhD Students Accessing Research Council Funding

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
London September, 2019

News Release

Leading Routes: The Broken Pipeline - Barriers to Black PhD Students Accessing Research Council Funding

A new Leading Routes report reveals that inequalities and bias within higher education are substantially disadvantaging Black students and impacting their access to the funding required to support their further
education.
"These inequalities within academia undermine egalitarian ideals associated with equality, equity and diversity."
'The Broken Pipeline: Barriers to Black PhD Students Accessing Research Council Funding' presents the findings of a closed roundtable discussion held in February 2019. The report examines the link between the BME attainment gap at undergraduate level, and students' experiences when seeking council-funded postgraduate research places.

The report analyses key contributing factors across the higher education sector that affect Black students'access to research council funding including inequality and structural racism. It reveals that sector wide discrimination and bias continue to play a significant role in restricting access to funding and in consequence limiting the number of Black PhD students and academics in the UK.

The report further highlights a disconcerting figure: over a three year period just 1.2% of the 19,868 studentships awarded by all UKRI research councils went to Black or Black Mixed students and only 30 of those were from Black Caribbean background.

"We can see that there have been improvements overall in undergraduate recruitment numbers over the years, with many Black students going on to pursue taught postgraduate programmes," says Paulette Williams founder of Leading Routes. "However, progress tails off dramatically at postgraduate research level - particularly when it comes to Black PhD students securing funding from research councils. We need an intervention that is supported at a national level to address this issue."
Access the full report.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Broken Pipeline - Barriers to Black PhD Students Accessing Research Council Funding - Leading Routes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
London September, 2019 News Release Leading Routes: The Broken Pipeline - Barriers to Black PhD Students Accessing Research Council Funding A new Leading Routes report reveals that inequalities and bias within higher education are substantially disadvantaging Black students and impacting their access to the funding required to support their furthereducation.

# data[].attributes.headline
Racism at Work webinar series: Be an Active Bystander

# data[].attributes.subject
Racism at Work webinar series: Be an Active Bystander

# data[].attributes.body
The Role of Race in Shaping the Experiences of Black and Minority Ethnic Students, by Sofia Akel

# data[].attributes.headline
A 12-Step Program for Decolonizing the University: A Conversation with Dr. Rodney Coates

# data[].attributes.subject
A 12-Step Program for Decolonizing the University: A Conversation with Dr. Rodney Coates

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A 12-Step Program for Decolonizing the University: A Conversation with Dr Rodney Coates

# data[].attributes.headline
Sage resources on Structural Racism and Police Violence: Causes, Impact, Reform

# data[].attributes.subject
Sage resources on Structural Racism and Police Violence: Causes, Impact, Reform

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The work of social and behavioral scientists is crucial in helping to dismantle mechanisms of discrimination, oppression, and violence and create a radically improved society. This collection shares freely accessible articles to support researchers in future scholarship and amplify their critical work; educators as they discuss the impacts of systemic racism with students; and policymakers and advocates in their fight to make sweeping reform.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The work of social and behavioral scientists is crucial in helping to dismantle mechanisms of discrimination, oppression, and violence and create a radically improved society. This collection shares freely accessible articles to support researchers in future scholarship and amplify their critical work; educators as they discuss the impacts of systemic racism with students; and policymakers and advocates in their fight to make sweeping reform.

# data[].attributes.headline
Petition: Declare Brighton & Hove to be an anti-racist city

# data[].attributes.subject
Petition: Declare Brighton & Hove to be an anti-racist city

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
On 12th June 2020 Brighton & Hove City Council issued a statement pledging to be an anti-racist council. We welcome this statement, and ask the council to go further and declare the city of Brighton & Hove to be an Anti-Racist City. To drive inclusion in our city, embrace cultural diversity and encourage equity of opportunity, our community must work together to be actively anti-racist.

Building on the history of the people of Brighton, who have always turned out on mass to protest against far-right marches and meetings that have descended on our city, including the landmark moment when Mosely gathered the far-right at The Level in 1948 and the people of Brighton turned out to protest and successfully halted this event.

Brighton has the spirit to lead the way in being the beacon city for anti-racism and true empowerment to black people and people of colour, as it has shown for our LGBTQIA+ community. Brighton is a city of inclusivity, recognised both nationally and internationally, and we believe this city is capable of setting the example for what it means to be a truly Anti-Racist City.

Brighton And Hove City Council has already demonstrated the commitment and ambition to achieve this, however, it is vital that this is demonstrated through concrete and visible actions. By bringing all of our city's organisations, services, community groups and individuals together to combat racism and prejudice. We can make Brighton & Hove an example to the rest of the country on how to create a truly inclusive city.

Our requests are:

Terminology - Brighton & Hove City Council (BHCC) should use appropriate terminology when referring to people who are targets of racism because they are not white. People Of Colour is the appropriate term to use. BAME and BME also refers to minority ethnic people, which can include any group of people that find themselves in an ethnic minority, but they may not experience racism due to the colour of their skin. To address the needs and lived experiences of people who have experienced racism, People Of Colour is a good term to use.

Schools - we welcome the news that BHCC are working on a schools program. The council should actively work with schools ensuring a safe, anti-racist, non-hostile environment is created for children, families and staff. This work should address recruiting People Of Colour to redress the lack of representation throughout the hiring in schools for teachers, head teachers and governors. Schools should recruit at least two parent governor positions for POC and actively recruit for the positions to be filled. There should be a format for people to raise concerns about racism they are experiencing or witnessing within their school anonymously with a link directly to the council which is monitored and responded to. Brighton schools should have anti-racism, history of POC, British imperialism and colonialism taught at a significant level throughout the school curriculum across all year groups. Schools should also be included in the education program in the next point.

Adult education program - an anti racism education program needs to take place in workplaces, and service providers throughout Brighton. The most effective delivery of this is through specialised theatre education projects that involve both performance, interactive workshop, and in service training. This is an effective delivery system which has proven success in both delivery and outcomes. BHCC should commission this work to be created and delivered throughout education establishments, workplaces and service providers to ensure effective education to facilitate the creation of an anti racist city.

Businesses - BHCC should not purchase the services from any provider that has not demonstrated that they have anti-racist policies and employ POC as full time staff members. Businesses should commit to anti-racism processes in order to bid for council tenders and show that they are actively addressing diversity and anti-racist policies in their businesses. There should be initiatives run with Brighton's business community to set targets and timeframes to increase diversity in these organisations.

Council BAME group - BHCC should create a second paid position on the currently named The BME Worker's Forum, to ensure that it is successful in its ability to take an active role in driving change in the future city council, so the burden is never left to just one person, to be the lone voice in any meeting. There should be a facility for all council staff to anonymously raise concerns about racism they are experiencing or witnessing within their workplace, that is monitored and responded to.

Festivals - BHCC should commit to being the new hosts for the RISE festival, which was ended through funding cuts. As Brighton has proven itself to be outstanding hosts to PRIDE, it can now demonstrate that it leads the way as a city of anti racism by hosting RISE festival, giving it a new permanent home. BHCC should ensure that Brighton Festival, Brighton Fringe, and the film festival all demonstrate substantial representation of POC and this should be the key factor in them allowing the festivals to take place in the city. Each festival should have a specific space dedicated to showing the work of POC as well as included throughout the festivals.

Policing - Brighton & Hove City Council need to take an active role in addressing the detrimental actions of Sussex Police towards People Of Colour, particularly Black people, that have resulted in hostile experiences for POC to live in or visit Brighton. BHCC must conduct an inquiry into Sussex Police practices which disproportionately target and impact Black people and People Of Colour. Particularly the practice of Stop and Search, high amounts of Use Of Force, and application of PREVENT involving children and families of People Of Colour. Social justice groups and the media have raised concern that Brighton has one of the highest disparities in the country, with 3.5 white people in every 1000 stopped by Sussex Police in the last year compared to 38 in 1000 black people. We find this inequality unacceptable in a council that declares itself anti-racist. BHCC needs to outline an action plan for working with Sussex Police to change this culture in order to ensure their human rights are respected as residents or visitors of Brighton.

Funding for cultural research & community spaces - funding cuts have stripped away services and projects for people of colour in our city such as the Black and Minority Ethnic Young People's Project (BMEYPP). The Black and Minority Ethnic Community Partnership (BMECP) is a useful and highly valued facility, however, People Of Colour still feel disenfranchised in our city. Brighton & Hove's Black History Month has done fantastic work and the council could add to this by funding research into the history of People Of Colour in Brighton and Hove, and the history of anti-racism, by collaborating with the city's two universities. The research could be displayed on a website. We also propose the council works with residents of colour to create a community-run hub in a central Brighton location. This space could include a community café, workshop training areas, and a performance area to provide a permanent venue for people of colour to share their creativity with our city. This would demonstrate a genuine commitment to anti-racism.

i360 Sponsorship - the council should end sponsorship of council managed spaces by brands that support racist policies - British Airways is the sponsor for the i360 and many residents were appalled at the council lighting it purple to demonstrate an 'anti-racist' stance. British Airways are complicit in the hostile environment and make £30 million per annum from deportation contracts. These deportations of People Of Colour are to countries where their lives may be in danger, where they may have no family or friends, and may have never lived there. British Airways have not investigated the death of Jimmy Mubenga who was suffocated whilst being deported on a British Airways flight in October 2010. His last words were 'I can't breathe'. As Brighton and Hove city council are so moved by the last words of George Floyd, they should be equally as moved by the final words of Jimmy Mubenga and end relations with British Airways. They owe the council £3.1 million (10% of annual profits from deportation contracts). We ask that this £3.1 million be ring-fenced for targeted community support for people of colour.

Brighton & Hove has a reputation as an open and inclusive city, but we know there are areas in which we fall woefully short. We ask you to build on the brave ideals this city is known for and lead the way for this country by demonstrating the power of Brighton & Hove as an Anti-Racist City.

From

The People of Brighton & Hove who have signed this petition
Note: This petition was created by several residents of Brighton to present at an open council meeting

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On 12th June 2020 Brighton & Hove City Council issued a statement pledging to be an anti-racist council. We welcome this statement, and ask the council to go further and declare the city of Brighton & Hove to be an Anti-Racist City.

# data[].attributes.body
UCU Sussex have made a £250 donation to this cause and will be lobbying UEG to make a more substantial donation to demonstrate a material commitment to Black Lives and Education beyond the Sussex community.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Education is at the heart of growth and transformation in our society. Today we stand at a critical juncture in our collective history - things cannot continue the same after this moment. It is imperative we focus on what the production of knowledge looks like after this point.

The Free Black University is a hub for radical and transformative knowledge production. The fight to decolonise education has been going on for years and it has become ever clearer that more is required than what the current education system can offer.

Universities hold a deep responsibility when it comes to racism, the knowledge that introduced the very ideology of racism into our society was born in British Universities.

The Free Black University exists to re-distribute knowledge and act as a space of incubation for the creation of transformative knowledge in the Black community. We firmly believe education should centre Black people healing and it should be free, anti-colonial, and accessible to all - so we will provide it. Further, the University is often a site of trauma for far too many Black students and so our project brings well being and the healing of our community to the fore.

This project also brings climate justice to the fore as we recognise the relationship between the climate crisis and colonialism. Climate justice will run through all of the threads of our work as we centre structural and holistic approaches to preserving the world we all live in.

We MUST engage critical thought in the wider mission for liberation and freedom, the world is ever changing, and the thought leaders of the next generation need deep and transformational spaces to develop their thinking in the face of the present challenges.

The long-term vision for this work is to:

1) The transformation of minds is critical to the transformation of society and so we will specifically provide Black radical books to people right across the community who would otherwise not have access to it - this includes those incarcerated

2) Deliver a range of open access and very accessible online lectures and teachings to the community exploring radical and transformational topics

3) Create a space of community and care for Black students - there is a mental health crisis amongst Black students that universities are failing to sufficiently address. As an organisation healing is a foundational principle - this will be a space through which Black students can connect to various modes of support and healing work. mental health support and healing work. We will connect with Black therapists, counsellors, and community healers to offer a range of support to our community

4) Build an open access, free, and expansive online library of radical readings writings from people across the world - we will no longer stand for the gatekeeping of knowledge for those who desire access to it

5) Build a publication - the type of knowledge that is being produced will only ever be as radical as the 'peers' reviewing will allow it to be. Our journal, and later our Press, will centre radical and transformational thought that may not be respected under the current frame of knowledge. Our work will be driven by the radical Black imagination, it is all that can cut through Eurocentric thought.

6) A member's space for emerging Black academics that need support and community during and beyond their academic journey

7) A podcast that will explore complex and transformational ideas in accessible and simplistic ways - this podcast will speak to Black thinkers, organisers, academics, spiritualists, creatives, etc. The podcast is to allow absolutely anyone to tune in and learn something new about the history, present, and futures of Black liberation through a critical lens

8) We will build a physical space - a hub for our work and a space for all Black people to access. This space will include; teaching rooms, a book shop, restaurant, and healing areas. The entire space will be created intentionally and in the interest of anti-colonial and healing work.

9) An annual conference that brings together Black radical thinkers (that are not only academics) to collectively produce knowledge and vision for Black liberation

10) FREE AND ACCESSIBLE EDUCATION CENTRED ON THE FREEDOM OF BLACK PEOPLE WHICH NECESSARILY SUCCEEDS THE FREEDOM OF ALL PEOPLE

What we are doing here is transformative - it has the potential to entirely transform the landscape of education and knowledge production. This world CLEARLY needs new and transformative ideas if we are to ever stamp out the visceral racism that exists across the world. Black thinkers and Black visionaries need to lead this intellectual revolution - the best way that we can do that is through creating intentionally anti-colonial and caring spaces for Black students to do this work.

Let us show universities all over the world just what can be done when the agenda of Black liberation is at the heart of building spaces that produce knowledge and teach. This project is Black, queer, trans, anti-colonial, and revolutionary from its very heart. Help us bring this vision into fruition.

What your donation could do:

£15 will buy one book for people in the community

£50 would pay for a podcast episode and equipment

£150 would pay for a days work behind the scenes

£200 would pay for one free admission to our annual conference

£300 would pay for a collective healing session for Black students

£350 would pay for one community radical workshop for Black folk to attend

£500 would pay to create one publicly accessible lecture

£1000 would pay for the process of publication for a journal article and building towards our University Press

£50,000 is the suggested initial contribution from UK universities - this is less than the cost for two students to complete a 3-year degree - this money would go directly to the fund to build a physical space

If you have any enquiries please email us at [email redacted]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Free Black University Fund, organized by Melz Owusu

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Education is at the heart of growth and transformation in our society. Today we stand at a critical juncture in our collective history - things cannot continue the same after this moment. It is imperative we focus on what the production of knowledge looks like after this point.

# data[].attributes.headline
Institutionalized Racism - JSTOR Syllabus

# data[].attributes.subject
Institutionalized Racism - JSTOR Syllabus

# data[].attributes.body
a syllabus on institutional racism - all articles and cited research are free to access.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The United States has seen escalating protests over the past week, following the death of George Floyd while in custody of the Minneapolis police. Educators everywhere are asking how can we help students understand that this was not an isolated, tragic incident perpetrated by a few bad individuals, but part of a broader pattern of institutionalized racism. Institutional racism-a term coined by Stokely Carmichael (later known as Kwame Ture) and Charles V. Hamilton in their 1967 book Black Power: The Politics of Liberation in America-is what connects George Floyd and Breonna Taylor with Ahmaud Arbery, Philando Castile, Sandra Bland, Eric Garner, Emmett Till, and the thousands of other people who have been killed because they were " black in America."

This context seems vital for discussions both inside and outside the classroom. The following articles, published over the course of JSTOR Daily's five years try to provide such context. As always, the underlying scholarship is free for all readers. We have now updated this story with tagging for easier navigation to related content, will be continually updating this page with more stories, and are working to acquire a bibliographic reading list about institutionalized racism in the near future. (Note: Some readers may find some of the stories in this syllabus or the photos used to illustrate them disturbing. Teachers may wish to use caution in assigning them to students.)

Racial (In)Justice: Putting Protest into Perspective

Video Documentation & Police Brutality: Ethical Considerations

Racial, Economic, and Educational Disparities Go Hand in Hand

Editor's notes: We welcome reader comments: get in touch with comments, pitch us, or offer recommendations for further coverage here. Submission guidelines (we pay all our writers) here. These articles are just a small selection of the work we publish on JSTOR Daily. We've added tags on this article to help you find your way to related content, but are in the process of reviewing our tagging structure so these may change. We encourage you to sign up for our newsletter to get a digest of stories each week. Note: This story was updated June 4 with additional stories and tags for navigation to other related content. Thanks to reader comments, the introduction was updated June 3 with Breonna Taylor and Sandra Bland's names and the phrase "people of color" was changed to "people." To support JSTOR Daily's work providing historical and scholarly context to the news and current affairs, you can become a member on Patreon.
Resources

JSTOR is a digital library for scholars, researchers, and students. JSTOR Daily readers can access the original research behind our articles for free on JSTOR.

Journal of Negro Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Institutionalized Racism: A Syllabus | JSTOR Daily

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The United States has seen escalating protests over the past week, following the death of George Floyd while in custody of the Minneapolis police. Educators everywhere are asking how can we help students understand that this was not an isolated, tragic incident perpetrated by a few bad individuals, but part of a broader pattern of institutionalized racism.

# data[].attributes.headline
Why diversity training on campus is likely to disappoint

# data[].attributes.subject
Why diversity training on campus is likely to disappoint

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
U.S. colleges and universities will be embracing diversity training with renewed vigor this fall.

In response to the killing of George Floyd, the massive Black Lives Matter protests and pressure from students, dozens of colleges and universities have made public commitments to new anti-racism initiatives.

The University of Florida will require all students, faculty and staff to undergo training on "racism, inclusion and bias." Northeastern University will institute "cultural competency" and "anti-racism training" for every member of the campus community. And Ohio Wesleyan University will mandate "universal diversity, equity, and inclusion training."

Given the vital importance of confronting past and present racism, we believe it is imperative that colleges and universities address racial disparities and discrimination in higher education head-on. However, as scholars who study race and social inequality, we know that diversity training suffers from " chronically disappointing results." Recent research in psychology even suggests that diversity training may cause more problems than it solves.

What diversity training looks like

Called into a typical diversity training session, you may be told to complete a " privilege walk ": step forward if "you are a white male," backward if your "ancestors were forced to come to the United States," forward if "either of your parents graduated from college," backward if you "grew up in an urban setting," and so on.

You could be instructed to play " culture bingo." In this game, you would earn points for knowing "what melanin is," the "influence Zoot suits had on Chicano history" or your "Chinese birth sign."

You might be informed that white folks use "white talk," which is "task-oriented" and "intellectual," while people of color use "color commentary," which is "process-oriented" and "emotional."

You will most definitely be encouraged to internalize an ever-expanding diversity lexicon. This vocabulary includes terms such as Latinx, microaggressions and white privilege.

It also features terms that are more obscure, like "adultism," which is defined as "prejudiced thoughts and discriminatory actions against young people, in favor of the older."

Disappointing results and unintended consequences

In terms of reducing bias and promoting equal opportunity, diversity training has " failed spectacularly," according to the expert assessment of sociologists Frank Dobbin and Alexandra Kalev. When Dobbin and Kalev evaluated the impact of diversity training at more than 800 companies over three decades, they found that the positive effects are short-lived and that compulsory training generates resistance and resentment.

"A company is better off doing nothing than mandatory diversity training," Kalev concluded.

Some of the most popular training approaches are of dubious value. There is evidence, for example, that introducing people to the most commonly used readings about white privilege can reduce sympathy for poor whites, especially among social liberals.

There is also evidence that emphasizing cultural differences across racial groups can lead to an increased belief in fundamental biological differences among races. This means that well-intentioned efforts to celebrate diversity may in fact reinforce racial stereotyping.

With its emphasis on do's and don't's, diversity training tends to be little more than a form of etiquette. It spells out rules that are just as rigid as those that govern the placement of salad forks and soup spoons. The fear of saying "the wrong thing" often leads to unproductive, highly scripted conversations.

This is the exact opposite of the kinds of debates and discussions that you would hope to find on a college campus.

The main beneficiaries of the forthcoming explosion in diversity programming will be the swelling ranks of "diversity and inclusion" consultants who stand to make a pretty penny. A one-day training session for around 50 people costs anywhere between US$2,000 and $6,000. Robin DiAngelo, the best-selling author of "White Fragility," charges up to $15,000 per event.

In this belt-tightening era of COVID-19, should colleges and universities really be spending precious dollars on measures that have been "proven to fail"?

Alternatives to training

In our view, instead of pouring money into diversity training, colleges and universities would be better off using their limited resources to provide increased financial aid and better academic support systems for underrepresented students. The increasing number of scholarships and fellowships that have been established in George Floyd's name are a welcome step in this direction.

We also recommend that schools invest more in expanding the full range of educational opportunities at their disposal to better understand and disrupt systemic racism.

This includes coursework, lecture series, discussion panels, student speak-outs, college-wide teach-ins, exhibitions, performances and common readings. Such an approach would enable universities to use the extensive knowledge and expertise that their faculty, students and staff already have on issues of race and inequality. It would be far better than relying on the kind of mass-produced, drive-through diversity training provided by outside "experts."

Campus communities don't need diversity consultants to lead workshops about terms such as "microaggressions," "micro-invalidations" and "micro-insults." Instead they should discuss thought-provoking works such as poet Claudia Rankine's book "Citizen," a personal account that " strips bare the everyday realities of racism."

Rather than simply declaring that "illegal immigrant" is an unacceptable derogatory term, analyze Jason De Leon's " The Land of Open Graves," a vivid portrait that "pushes our understanding of how lives are lived and lost on the U.S.-Mexican border to a new level."

[ Deep knowledge, daily. Sign up for The Conversation's newsletter.]

To explain the concept of " intersectionality," replace " social identity wheel" exercises with an examination of the 1977 Combahee River Collective Statement, whose Black feminist authors insisted that it was not possible to "separate race from class from sex oppression."

Facing urgent calls for action, colleges and universities have embraced diversity training to try to prove that they really are doing something to advance racial justice. But the relevant evidence suggests that in offering ineffective, superficial remedies to the complex problems of prejudice and exclusion, diversity training will shortchange campus communities and short-circuit critical thinking.

If colleges and universities want to effect meaningful social change, they will soon discover that diversity training is no substitute for education.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why diversity training on campus is likely to disappoint

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
U.S. colleges and universities will be embracing diversity training with renewed vigor this fall. In response to the killing of George Floyd, the massive Black Lives Matter protests and pressure from students, dozens of colleges and universities have made public commitments to new anti-racism initiatives.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Researchers at all levels understand that conducting research within the UK Higher Education system requires a process. A process which regularly goes through stages of: choosing a research topic; searching, reading and reviewing literature; identifying participants or a sample; choosing methods to collect data; the process of data collection, writing up the findings; and disseminating the research to wider audiences.

While all researchers know that in practice research is not a linear process (no matter how many research guides imply it is) a significant part requires an engagement and interrogation with other scholarly work. My current thoughts around the research process are not written to engage in debates surrounding decolonising this research process entirely, nor do they critique the colonial and imperialistic lens with which this normalised research process upholds. Those are larger debates that require adequate space, time and respect to deconstruct. Instead, my current thoughts focus on a specific area - e ngaging with scholarly literature and theoretical frameworks, which new contributions to knowledge are often based on.

In particular, I have been thinking of literature search strategies that can be used to identify Black scholars and Scholars of Colour. I have been testing these strategies in an attempt to decolonise my PhD research through small acts of solidarity with the decolonising the curriculum movement. One of my strategies, a simple 5 step process, illustrates how this can be done in any academic field and is available here.

decolonise literature literature reviews research scholars

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Researchers at all levels understand that conducting research within the UK Higher Education system requires a process. A process which regularly goes through stages of: choosing a research topic; searching, reading and reviewing literature; identifying participants or a sample; choosing methods to collect data; the process of data collection, writing up the findings; and disseminating...

# data[].attributes.headline
Beyond Guilt and Privilege: Abolishing the White Race

# data[].attributes.subject
Beyond Guilt and Privilege: Abolishing the White Race

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Now is not the time to focus on whiteness. And yet, if our movement hopes to abolish white domination, we must at least ask what whiteness means. We should be clear on its history and effects on our social existence. Neither endless introspection among white people, nor corporate handbooks on diversity, nor a purely moral recognition of white supremacy's evils can provide such clarity. We need to examine whiteness as a political problem.

The materials in this pamphlet were written by various authors and originate in distinct historical moments. We have assembled them here with the aim, in light of the recent rebellions, to move discussions from a fixation on individual experiences of whiteness toward the broad possibilities of collective struggle for abolition and human freedom.

We encourage readers to download, distribute, and discuss.

Table of Contents

Introduction: On Becoming a Different People Entirely

Inventing Whiteness

1. Pem Davidson Buck, "Constructing Race, Creating White Privilege" (2001)

2. W. E. B. Du Bois, "The White Worker" (1935)

3. Thuy Linh Tu and Nikhil Pal Singh, "Morbid Capitalism and its Racial Symptoms" (2018)

Abolishing Whiteness

1. Asad Haider, "White Purity" (2017)

2. Noel Ignatiev, "Without a Science of Navigation We Cannot Sail in Stormy Seas" (1969)

3. Lorenzo Komboa Ervin, "Back from Hell: Black Power and Treason to Whiteness inside Prison Walls" (1994)

4. Jay Caspian Kang, "Black Protester, White Protester" (2020)

Download

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Beyond Guilt and Privilege: Abolishing the White Race - Viewpoint Magazine

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
If Black rebellion is often the spark for mass struggle in the United States, white chauvinism is a wet blanket. The materials in this pamphlet aim to move the discussion from a fixation on individual experiences of whiteness toward the broad possibilities of collective struggle for abolition and human freedom.

# data[].attributes.headline
Learning lessons: the articulation of antisemitism on campus

# data[].attributes.subject
Learning lessons: the articulation of antisemitism on campus

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
We need to understand the forms antisemitism takes, and the ways in which it transcends, as well as intersecting with, debates about Palestine and Israel. A failure to listen attentively to reports of antisemitism is partly produced by a polarised and moralised discourse, in which Palestinian activism becomes a focal point of anti-racist campaigns in general. An antagonistic approach to Jewish voices can mean that the pain of antisemitism becomes unhearable in certain spaces. This is not inevitable, and must be addressed by resisting the binaries this discourse produces, and working patiently to respond to and resist antisemitism.
Every day that I have spent writing this article there have been stories about antisemitism in British politics in the headlines. No doubt they will still be in the news as you read this. Antisemitism appears to be on the rise both globally and nationally, recently provoking what may yet be a realignment in centre-left politics. ¹

It is, then, not coincidental that universities, student unions, students and teachers are also currently grappling with antisemitism and the myriad issues that come with it. Despite popular concerns both within and outside universities that students need to learn more about 'the real world', we know that universities are already part of that 'real world': the world of work, citizenship, living alongside other people, of unequal power, conflict, racism, the world still suffering and reeling from colonialism and the Holocaust. Presumably this is why the national media cares so much about campus politics. ² There are many lessons about the real world that universities teach our students, not all of them entirely conscious or deliberate, and many lessons that students learn despite what we hoped to teach them. It is right that policy-makers and the general public care about this. ³

UCL, the university in which I teach, is currently debating the adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's (IHRA) definition of antisemitism. ⁴ This move, which is by no means popular with everyone, follows on from a rejection of the same definition by the student union (SU). ⁵ In response, the university's Jewish Society (JSoc) put out a poll simply asking members about their experiences of antisemitism. Within a couple of hours, 78 students (between a third and a half of all our Jewish students) had responded, and 72 per cent of them reported that they had experienced antisemitism on campus. Forty-six students provided descriptions of their experiences, which included racial slurs, antisemitic tropes and conspiracy theories, hurtful remarks and 'jokes' about the Holocaust and Nazis, remarks about their appearance, and physical and verbal aggression and bullying.

We cannot accept this.

Antisemitism - like other oppressions - has its own language, tropes, code words and dog whistles. ⁶ One of the problems in tackling it, which is partly what the IHRA definition attempts to address, is that it is not always immediately obvious what antisemitism is, or why certain tropes or conspiracy theories are antisemitic. Therefore, academics need to learn as well as teach, as we work with students to challenge racism and enable the difficult conversations that it is our core business to engage in.

This work is often painful, as I have discovered in the last couple of years, since volunteering to run a small research project with three of my Jewish students to find out what life is like for them. The project originated as a response to specific difficult events, but as a non-Jewish tutor who teaches qualitative research methods, for me this was initially an opportunity to teach a small group of students some principles of small-scale interpretivist research. ⁷ My three bright and eager students interviewed twenty-six of their fellow Jewish students, thinking carefully about issues of informed consent, anonymity, sampling, reflexivity and systematic analysis. They recorded, transcribed and coded the conversations thematically and we made a podcast series about it together to disseminate our findings, which was warmly received by colleagues and students. ⁸

This kind of work is a useful complement to large scale survey-based studies, such as that conducted by the National Union of Students in 2016/17. ⁹ Their study reported concerning findings about Jewish students' perceptions of antisemitism on campus at a national level. However, surveys do not allow us to go into detail about the stories behind the numbers. A small-scale but intensive, interview-based project like ours - which listened to a wide range of Jewish students from different years, departments and denominations, including those who do not get involved with religious or Jewish Society activities and would not be reached by JSoc - is able to provide a rich contextualisation and explanation of those findings. ¹⁰ It is of course limited by the fact that we were working with students from just one university, but as we have one of the larger Jewish student populations in the UK, it should offer some indications about how antisemitism operates in universities. ¹¹

We were deeply troubled by our findings and I have continued to struggle with how to think about antisemitism, as well as how we engage with conflicts that intersect with much larger national and international flows of power, when they emerge at the scale of our own work and lives. We found ample evidence of familiar forms of antisemitism that were not related to Palestinian activism operating alongside a polarised and moralised discourse about PalestineIsrael, which made it difficult for real and painful discussions about antisemitism to take place. ¹² This problem was exacerbated by the particular form of debates about freedom of speech and how they intersect with concerns about antisemitism. This context makes it both urgent, and yet also difficult, to disentangle and address antisemitism.

Antisemitism on campus

All the Jewish students interviewed in our small project agreed that our university is, by and large, a safe and pleasant place to study. It is difficult to draw conclusions from this finding: people often play down deep injuries, since talking about them is painful. Nevertheless, most students only had one or two upsetting incidents they wanted to tell us about, and whilst they did so with the vividness that characterises unhealed wounds and ongoing vigilance, they did not seem to be experiencing harassment as a daily experience. This is important to say, because it is not helpful to alarm (prospective) students.

The second thing to say is that much of the antisemitism we learned about had nothing explicitly to do with conversations about Israel or Palestine, which seems to run counter to claims about that a 'new antisemitism' is currently circulating. The proponents of the discourse of 'the new antisemitism' claim that Israel attracts disproportionate criticism not levelled at other states, in ways that are linked to hatred of Jews. ¹³ Critics of this position counter that allegations of antisemitism are used in bad faith to silence legitimate criticism of Israel. This highly polarised debate is well known to students and, of course, forms the politicised backdrop of any discussion about antisemitism. This matters, but not quite in the ways we expected.

Before discussing the 'new' antisemitism, I should stress that much of the antisemitism that students narrated was not 'old poison in new bottles': the bottles were old too. ¹⁴ We came across many students who were afraid of disclosing that they were Jewish because of experiences of being called names or having to listen to jokes about Nazis, antisemitic tropes about rich Jews or stingy Jews, or Jews controlling the media or the supermarkets, or the world, or having to endure judgement about whether or not they 'looked Jewish'. Students who were bored of tedious jokes about eating pork. A student who had been chased down the street just outside our main quad, apparently because he was Jewish. Jokes about the Holocaust, patronising explanations of the Holocaust from non-Jews ('goysplaining'), crass comparisons between the Holocaust and unrelated issues such as animal rights. Doubts about the Holocaust's importance were in one case signalled by the question, 'What do you think about the Holocaust?' The student on the receiving end had had family members murdered by the Nazis. We also came across belittling comments from tutors ranging from a refusal to make accommodations for religious festivals, to sexist remarks about women students being 'good Jewish girls', to extraordinarily rude, antisemitic comments, such as 'all you fucking Jews stick together, don't you?', to downplaying the horrors of the Holocaust in class.

There was clearly a pattern of ugly attitudes and behaviour just under the surface of campus life. This implies a surprising lack of literacy in the old tropes and conspiracy theories of antisemitism, and of empathy towards Jewish students, particularly when discussing the Holocaust. Quite often I despaired to see a lack even of the basic critical thinking - such as the ability to spot a conspiracy theory - that universities like to think we promote.

Several incidents were particularly troubling: one student had discovered Holocaust-denying leaflets in a part of the university where only staff and students had access, and another had discovered antisemitic graffiti in the toilets. The really sobering thing was that these students had no idea who to go to to report these incidents. We found that the SU was instinctively not trusted by Jewish students to take their concerns seriously. It seems likely to me that the SU officers would be sorry to hear this. I believe that they want the campus to be free of Holocaust denial and swastikas. So, how has it happened that Jewish students end up feeling that their SU will not be their ally against antisemitism of the crudest form?

Moralising tones: 'the people who are right'

In a nicely observed vignette in her recent hit novel, one of Sally Rooney's young characters judges that his mother 'has values' because she is interested in 'the cause of Palestinian liberation'. The matter is left there and the complexities are not discussed further at any point in the book. ¹⁵ No more needs to be said: we understand what we need to about her stance on any number of issues through this brief remark.

Another vignette may illustrate why this particular political commitment can feel threatening to Jewish students. Professor Steve Fielding of Nottingham University's School of Politics recently said on a podcast that as a young student:

I refused to go into the Anne Frank house because, I told my friend, 'no I'm not going in there because of the way the Israeli government uses the Holocaust to manipulate support for its everyday policies'. At [...] that very moment the Israeli military was doing terrible things in Lebanon. So, I come from that position, but I now have slightly changed my mind, partly from watching this film [ Denial] but also from experiencing all kinds of stuff that is being said at the moment. ¹⁶

It is important to note that this remark occurred in the context of a nuanced discussion about antisemitism, Holocaust denial and remembrance. Even so, the word 'slightly' plays an intriguing role in this off-the-cuff discussion. It is apparently not straightforward simply to feel mortified, in retrospect, by a callow refusal to enter a museum in Europe commemorating the murder of a teenage girl, along with most of her family, by the Nazis. How can this be? I want to be clear, here, that I do not want to attack or judge Fielding. Rather, I simply want to note that abandoning that youthful stance is evidently not easy, precisely because to say 'that is the position I come from' is to imply a whole set of linked political positions and allegiances, so that a certain amount of difficult reconfiguration must take place if that position is to be qualified or complicated.

Ruth Sheldon perceptively uses the category of 'melodrama' to understand what is going on here. Students are socialised into taking up particular roles in what feels like a two-sided ongoing debate, which is always pre-scripted and comes with its own already-given arguments and allegiances, in which everyone's mind is always already made up. As she points out, this debate is not just polarised, but also highly moralised. ¹⁷

One useful way of thinking about this is to consider Palestinian activism as a kind of 'empty signifier', in the sense used by Ernesto Laclau, through which a whole range of implied political positions are joined together. ¹⁸ Laclau understands the linking of different political claims into a discursive field through the punning concept of 'articulation': both in terms of articulating a position, and also linked, like an articulated lorry. Chains of articulated discursive claims come to constitute a binary field. By the logic of this analysis, there is nothing inevitable about the Palestinian cause coming to be symbolic of a broader left politics. 19 This is not to diminish the particular importance of the intolerable plight of Palestinians. But it is to say that allegiances to Palestine comes to stand in as the materialised contemporary form of radical politics, moral correctness and solidarity with the oppressed, even at the expense of taking seriously both remembrance of the Holocaust and the specific histories of persecution of particular Jews. Even the partial and caveated renunciation of any one of those articulated political allegiances then takes the kind of patient disentangling that Fielding has himself shown great willingness to engage in, but which seems to be intriguingly more difficult than we might expect.

One of my Jewish students has a kind of ironic shorthand that she uses to refer to fellow students who make use of the struggle for Palestinian self-determination as a signifier of their politics: 'the people who are right'. She is not referring, here, to those students who have thought carefully about the history and ethics of struggle in Palestine-Israel. Heavily involved in Palestinian activism, she has done much thinking on this topic herself. Rather, she is fearful of the pain caused in such discussions by analogies about Nazis, or playing down the importance of the Holocaust, or the use of antisemitic tropes. She is also nervous of an unreflective judgmental tone and moralising stance that collapses the full range of possible forms of being Jewish or being pro-Palestinian into a single binary opposition, exemplified by a remark she overheard when walking through campus: 'The Jews can have rights when they give the Palestinians rights'. ²⁰ She says she half wishes that debates about the IHRA definition of antisemitism would go away so that she doesn't have to walk past protests against it. It is not just that the tone of the debate is intimidating, though it is. To her, the whole framing of the discussion also seems to shut down real conversations about the conflict, its sources, its histories, its complexities, the prospects for solutions, the difference that might be made by students.

In a similar vein, in our research we talked to many Jewish students - the large majority of whom were not Israeli, and none of whom mentioned supporting the current Israeli government - who were desperate to discuss in a nuanced way their own complicated personal opinions about Israel, but who felt silenced by the aggressive tone of questioning that arose the moment they mentioned their Jewish identities. ²¹ Fears of antisemitism are deep-rooted, and linked to long histories of persecution and oppression, so students' responses to these small acts of aggression, judgement and silencing have to be understood empathetically in that context. Jewish students felt, in some cases, anger and indignation, and in others guilt and shame. Either way, these feelings precluded students from learning about Palestine-Israel in meaningful ways, and also taught them invidious lessons about how to engage with difference, what it is safe to say, and whom to trust.

Despite their own criticism of the Israeli government and, in some cases, personal engagement with the Palestinian cause, the Jewish students we spoke to were fearful of the SU's public display of the Palestinian flag in their offices or their enthusiastic support for the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions campaign or Israel Apartheid Week, because of the way they have tended to intersect with a moralised, melodramatic antipathy towards Jews, and a lack of concern about their experiences of antisemitism. It thus did not seem to come as much of a surprise to my co-researchers when one of the SU officers later got publicly in trouble for sharing antisemitic memes on social media and making ill-judged remarks about Nazis. The work that would have needed to go into understanding and being able to recognise problematic tropes about conspiracies was foreclosed. Jewish students have likewise withdrawn from the work of drawing attention to the racism they face. And it seems possible that accusations of antisemitism are assumed by SU officers to be vexatious because of the way they disrupt the articulated chain of demands that equates pro-Palestinian activism with opposition to Israel with anti-racism. The moralised discourse begins to unravel at the moment that antisemitism is taken seriously as a distinct claim; opposition to antisemitism cannot be articulated within the chain of demands.

We should, therefore, be very wary of moves to encourage articulation as a political strategy, of the type we have seen in left-wing movements. ²² In its production of equivalential discursive chains, articulation of political claims does not allow for the inclusion and negotiation of certain positions even as it amplifies others. This is not to imply that one cannot be both pro-Palestinian and opposed to antisemitism, but simply that the way the discursive chain is currently configured makes claims of antisemitism unhearable as a cause for concern to antiracists whose political positions are produced within this particular set of articulations.

Free speech, censorship and the things we can hear

Staff and students who are concerned about the IHRA definition of antisemitism, or who feel that accusations of antisemitism are made in bad faith, often talk about censorship. They fear they will not be able to voice criticism of Israel in the terms they wish to use. ²³ This is a juridical approach to the issue of 'free speech', which focuses on the things people are not permitted to say by law or regulation.

I find it useful to understand this by drawing on Michel Foucault's analysis, in a very different context, of the 'repressive hypothesis' of power. ²⁴ In brief, Foucault argues that we are always being told that we are forbidden to talk about, or have unsanctioned, sex. This story both derives from and reproduces a particular conceptualisation of power as the force that says 'no' and forbids. This way of thinking about power is in operation when we think in conventional terms about free speech: the censor is the power who silences our legitimate desire to speak.

Foucault does not, of course, deny that repressive power exists. However, he views it as a relatively rare and extreme form that is not typical of how everyday flows of power tend to work. Rather, he directs our attention to forms of productive power that are continually inciting us to talk about sex and to channel our desire and our energies into, for example, reproducing ourselves, or developing strategies of self-control. Crucially, the repressive hypothesis itself works to keep networks of productive power going: by focusing on repression, we are distracted from the web of productive power in which we are enmeshed.

What happens when we think about speech in terms of what we are not permitted to say? First, we focus on a struggle against potential censorship. For the avoidance of doubt, this is, as far as it goes, entirely right and reasonable: it is intolerable if Palestinians are unable to make claims in the places they live or in transnational spaces, or for students or academics to be required to be silent on issues of injustice. ²⁵ This matters a great deal. But I want to contend that it is not the only thing that matters.

The second thing that focusing only on repressive power does is to distract us from the production, for good or ill, of pre-scripted melodramas and polarising sets of articulated claims. In the particular circumstances of the university campus it is not obvious that the repressive power of the censor is the most troubling aspect of the situation we find ourselves in. Rather, we need to ask ourselves seriously why comparisons with Nazis seem to trip so easily from some tongues when Israel is discussed. Why is Israel persistently discussed as a 'racist endeavour' when so many other ethnonationalist or straightforwardly settler colonial states are not? Why did mentioning the name of Israel - and not any other country no matter how dark its history or role on the world stage - in a Business Studies class seem to silence the classroom as if a swearword had been uttered aloud? Why do some students wonder aloud what Jewish students think about the Holocaust, as if it were perhaps not so important as it is made out to be? Why might students demur from entering the Anne Frank museum but not, presumably, other museums, including those that sacralise war and exclusionary national narratives? ²⁶

There are some who diagnose a preoccupation with 'singling out' Israel or persistent use of offensive comparisons as a symptom of the speaker's 'true' antisemitic nature. This implies that we have a stable inner set of beliefs that are revealed by the things that we say, whether we know it or not. I suggest, rather, that our subjectivity is formed in complex and contradictory ways through our participation in broader discourses, whose implications, patterns and effects we may only distantly suspect. It follows from this position that we should look at the productive power that makes certain things sayable and thinkable - and that articulates particular moralised ways of thinking with other right-thinking causes - rather than at the repressive power that censors. Antisemitism is a set of discourses in which even antiracists can find themselves participating, rather than an indelible stain on a person's soul. And, as the discourses we use can be remade and rearticulated - with effort and work - it is also possible to stop participating in them whilst also maintaining other commitments, perhaps in different and more careful ways. This is a practical and forgiving approach that focuses more on concrete actions that can be made right, than on demonising particular speakers.

When the IHRA definition was debated at the SU, many worries about free speech and censorship were (freely) expressed. The debate was more memorable, though, for the things that were said unchallenged: complacent denials of the existence of antisemitism on campus, booing, and what participants described as an ugly cheer when the motion to adopt it failed. Jewish students were, by and large, more troubled by the lack of empathy and dismissive tone taken towards their fears, than the bare fact of the motion falling. This recalled another student event entitled 'Am I An Anti-Semite?'. ²⁷ The discussion (which I watched on video) troubled me not because of its focus on the legitimacy of criticism of the actions of the state of Israel, but rather because - despite its title - it did not address the fears of Jewish students who do face antisemitism. Plenty of students involved in Palestinian activism want to discuss and understand the ways in which criticism of Israel is sometimes antisemitic; their opportunity to do so is foreclosed by the dismissal of those claims through their subsumption into a discussion focused on the 'repressive hypothesis' of censorship.

Conclusion: disarticulation?

Jewish students face antisemitism on campus and do not trust their SU and their generally anti-racist colleagues and teachers to show support. I have attempted to explain this by positing that those students and staff are not essentially antisemitic, but rather are caught up in a broader articulated chain of equivalences that produces a moralised and binary discourse, marginalising claims of antisemitism because they cannot readily be understood within its frame of reference. This discourse, not accidentally but in some sense arbitrarily, positions students against each other in pre-scripted encounters in which all believe moralistically they are 'right'.

When I spoke about this project, I found to my surprise that some of my more right-wing friends, family members and acquaintances made common cause with me, for perhaps the first time. Ruth Sheldon describes beautifully how she noticed feeling judgmental towards pro-Israeli students in ways that foreclosed an empathetic response, until she traced her own feelings of complicity and shame. ²⁸ I have a very different positionality, and as a teacher I tend to be quite open towards students with different political views from my own. However, when old sparring partners from different political traditions thought they had found an ally in me because I was speaking against antisemitism, I discovered feelings of shame, judgment and complicity that required some reflexive unpacking. Of course, anyone serious about politics must be able and willing to build alliances across political divides. However, I realised that a process of articulation was going on here that it was important to resist: if I opposed antisemitism, did that mean that I was renouncing the causes of my left-wing friends? In a polarised field, was I simply changing sides and being rearticulated into the opposing 'side', which supports the surveillance of Muslim students or the aggressive, militarised policies of liberal democracies? This feeling of discomfort and shame helped me understand why many non-Jews on the left speak out about antisemitism less than we should. We need to recognise this trap for what it is. All it does is rearticulate the same old binary narrative in ways that fail to challenge antisemitism. Instead we need to disrupt and disentangle those articulated chains of equivalence, and to take seriously the particular struggles taking place on our campuses and elsewhere. This will take patience and kindness, not aggressive posturing and angry denunciations.

The accounts of antisemitism we heard in the course of our research are distressing. Of course, this is not the only sort of racism we find in universities. My students frequently worried that there were other people on campus and in the wider world having a more difficult time than they, or their Jewish colleagues, were. They were deeply concerned, as I am, with Islamophobia and racism on campus, with the unbearable situation of Palestinians, with the consequences of hostile borders, austerity and injustice. All I could say to them was that there is no 'Oppression Olympics'; by understanding their own situation and finding the voice and the skills to oppose their own oppression, they would be participating in anti-racist struggle, even though they may not benefit from the exhilarating self-righteousness of a chain of equivalences. Through doing and communicating this research, they were gaining the skills they would need as future citizens or activists, with patience, empathy and kindness. These students are now going off to work in teaching, social work and academia. They give me hope. Despite the pain and fear associated with antisemitism, they are still mainly focused on what they can do to make the world better. Their final wish for the legacy of our project? They wanted other students to be able to take part in similar small-scale research projects, particularly anyone facing racism and most particularly Muslim students.

Universities are places of learning: students do indeed have a lot to teach us.

Cathy Elliott is Senior Teaching Fellow in Qualitative Research Methods in the Political Science Department at UCL
Notes
1. Community Security Trust, Antisemitic Incidents: January-June 2018, Community Security Trust, London 2018; J. Watts and L. Buchan, 'Labour MPs quit party in disgust at antisemitism, Jeremy Corbyn's leadership and Brexit stance', Independent, 18 February 2019: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-mpresign-leave-party-corbyn-luciana-berger-brexit-chuka-umunna-a8784186.html, accessed 2 April 2019.

2. Just as one intriguing example, see H. Sullivan, 'Trigger unhappy: snowflake students can now skip exam topics they find "upsetting" and don't have to give a reason', Sun, 25 November 2018: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7824202/ snowflake-students-can-skip-exams/, accessed 2 April 2019.

3. The implicit lessons that students learn at universities are sometimes called 'the hidden curriculum'. See E. Margolis (ed), The Hidden Curriculum in Higher Education, Routledge: London 2001.

4. P. Daniels, 'UCL may adopt IHRA definition rejected by Students' Union', The Cheese Grater, 28 January 2019: https://cheesegratermagazine.org/2019/01/28/ students-union-ihra/, accessed 2 April 2019.

5. B. Weich, 'UCL Students' Union votes down motion to adopt IHRA definition of antisemitism', Jewish Chronicle, 23 January 2019: https://www.facebook.com/ groups/309887096581199/, accessed 2 April 2019.

6. See, for example, the trouble Suella Braverman MP recently landed herself in: S. Manavis, 'What is cultural Marxism? The alt-right meme in Suella Braverman's speech at Westminster', New Statesman, 29 March 2019: https://www. newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2019/03/what-cultural-marxism-alt-rightmeme-suella-bravermans-speech-westminster, accessed 2 April 2019.

7. C. Turner, 'Police called to UCL over "violent" anti-Israel protest which left Jewish students barricaded in a room', Telegraph, 28 October 2016: https://www.telegraph. co.uk/news/2016/10/28/police-called-to-top-university-over-violent-anti-israelprotest/ (accessed 2 April 2019); on research-based education, see: D. Fung, A Connected Curriculum for Higher Education, UCL Press, London 2017.

8. The podcast is available by searching for JewCL on iTunes or any podcast app. I am grateful beyond words to Manya Eversley, Laura Katan and Sarai Keestra for their work on this project and the many conversations we have had during and since. An honourable mention also goes to Jake Cohen, who always pushes me to see a different side of things. And we are hugely grateful to the students who courageously spent time talking to us about painful experiences.

9. NUS, The Experiences of Jewish Students in 2016-17, NUS, London 2017: https://www.nusconnect.org.uk/resources/the-experience-of-jewish-students-in-2016-17, accessed 2 April 2019.

10. A further useful resource that corroborates our findings is another qualitative study based on eight focus groups in five different cities: J. Boyd, Searching for community: A portrait of undergraduate Jewish students in five UK cities, Institute for Jewish Policy Research, London 2016.

11. D. Graham and J. Boyd, Home and away: Jewish journeys towards independence. Key Findings from the 2011 National Jewish Student Survey, Institute for Jewish Policy Research, London 2011.

12. There is no neutral way of referring to Palestine-Israel or Israel-Palestine. I am therefore following Ruth Sheldon, Tragic Encounters and Ordinary Ethics: PalestineIsrael in British Universities, Manchester University Press, Manchester 2016. I refer readers to her thoughtful account of the ethics of naming: pp 38-44.

13. K. Kahn-Harris and B. Gidley, Turbulent Times: The British Jewish Community Today, Continuum, London 2010, Chapter 7.

14. Ibid, p143.

15. S. Rooney, Normal People, Faber and Faber, London 2018.

16. S. Fielding and E. Burnell, 'Podnial', The Zeitgeist Tapes podcast: https://audioboom.com/posts/6983149-podnial, accessed 4 April 2019. The episode was first released in August 2018, during a period of intense debate about antisemitism in the Labour Party.

17. Sheldon, Tragic Encounters and Ordinary Ethics.

18. E. Laclau, On Populist Reason, Verso, London 2005.

19. Sheldon, Tragic Encounters and Ordinary Ethics, pp14-16; see also D. Rich, The Left's Jewish Problem: Jeremy Corbyn, Israel and Anti-Semitism, Biteback Publishing, London 2016, for a much more detailed but less measured account.

20. For the avoidance of doubt, the problem here is not only the idea that anyone should be stripped of their rights on the basis of 'group punishment', but also the elision of 'Jews', 'Israel' and the actions of the current Israeli government.

21. We have a large proportion of international students in our student body, and we interviewed two students who identified themselves as Israeli. They were no more uncritical of their current government than anyone else. Other students mentioned links with Israel through family ties, youth movements, trips and so on. These sorts of links are very common among British Jews.

22. G. Tremlett, 'The Podemos revolution: how a small group of radical academics changed European politics', Guardian, 31 March 2015: https://www.theguardian. com/world/2015/mar/31/podemos-revolution-radical-academics-changed-europeanpolitics, accessed 4 April 2019.

23. For example, see U. Inspector, 'UCL students reject IHRA definition of antisemitism', Pi Media, 22 January 2019: https://pimediaonline.co.uk/news/ ucl-students-reject-ihra-definition-of-antisemitism/, accessed 4 April 2019; D. Gayle, 'UK university censors title of Holocaust survivor's speech criticising Israel', Guardian, 29 September 2018: https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/ sep/29/manchester-university-censors-title-holocaust-survivor-speech-criticisingisrael, accessed 25 April 2019; H. Aked, 'So much for free speech: Southampton University and the pro-Israel lobby', 15 April 2015: https://www.opendemocracy.net/ en/opendemocracyuk/so-much-for-free-speech-southampton-university-andproisrael-lobby/, accessed 25 April 2019.

24. M. Foucault, The History of Sexuality: Vol.1 The Will to Power, Penguin, Harmondsworth 1976. I have written about free speech and the repressive hypothesis of power at more length in C. Elliott, Democracy Promotion as Foreign Policy: Temporal Othering in International Relations, Routledge, London 2017, chapters 2 and 6.

25. See, for example, U. McGahern, 'The struggle to be seen and heard in IsraelPalestine', Geopolitics 2019: DOI: 10.1080/14650045.2019.1598006.

26. For a great discussion of museums in naturalising and contesting national narratives, including museums that deal with the Holocaust, see J. Edkins, Trauma and the Memory of Politics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2013.

27. http://studentsunionucl.org/whats-on/events-activities/uclu-friends-of-palestineam-i-anti-semite, accessed 6 April 2019.

28. Sheldon, Tragic Encounters and Ordinary Ethics, chapter 2.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Learning lessons: the articulation of antisemitism on campus

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We need to understand the forms antisemitism takes, and the ways in which it transcends, as well as intersecting with, debates about Palestine and Israel. A failure to listen attentively to reports of antisemitism is partly produced by a polarised and moralised discourse, in which Palestinian activism becomes a focal point of anti-racist campaigns in general.

# data[].attributes.headline
Recentring the State: A Response to Barnaby Raine on Anti-Semitism

# data[].attributes.subject
Recentring the State: A Response to Barnaby Raine on Anti-Semitism

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This piece was first published in print in S alvage #7: Towards the Proletarocene. It is a response to Barnaby Raine's piece Jewophobia, which was published in Salvage #6: Evidence of Things Not Seen. The latest issue can be ordered individually here, or as part of a subscription, available here. Where our back issues are still available, they can be ordered here. Our poetry, fiction and art remains exclusive to the print edition, and some online content, including PDFs of all of our back issues, is only available to subscribers.

With ongoing smear campaigns against the Palestine solidarity movement as organised as they are cynical, and with the genuine growth of anti-Semitic violence - alongside growing racist attacks across the board - grappling seriously with anti-Semitism is of great strategic importance.

In the last issue of Salvage, Barnaby Raine's raised important questions about the contemporary nature of anti-Semitism in his article 'Jewophobia'. His contribution in this journal and elsewhere has been valuable given that the debate on anti-Semitism has been taken over by the Right and far Right, which attempts to discredit anti-Zionism or solidarity with the struggle for Palestinian liberation, whilst simultaneously masking its own racism - including against Jewish people.

Much discussion of contemporary anti-Semitism accepts a framing that suggests that the problem somehow emanates from Palestine. International solidarity movements with the Palestinian struggle for liberation, and by extension the Palestinian people themselves, are repeatedly identified as the source of growing anti-Semitism in the West - and this despite all reliable data pointing to the far Right as the overwhelmingly dominant source of anti-Semitic acts. This framing obstructs any understanding of the specific place of Jewish communities in our own societies, the centrality of anti-Semitism in the historic construction of Western states, or the connection between the contemporary growth of anti-Semitism and other forms of racism (primarily Islamophobia). At the same time, it allows discussions relating to Zionism to be framed almost exclusively as relating to Jews in the West, rather than to the ongoing settler-colonial dispossession, murder, and displacement of the Palestinian people at the hands of the Israeli state and its supporters. This erasure of Palestinians from discussions relating to Zionism touches, as we shall see, on the very nature of present-day anti-Semitism. This framing is then an assault on effective anti-racist and anti-imperialist struggles and campaigns.

We lack a clear and precise analysis of contemporary anti-Semitism, its origin and social role, particularly with respect to the West. Raine's work opens up such discussion on the Left, standing in trenchant opposition to the ongoing settler-colonial project in Palestine, and focusing on the specific social role of anti-Semitism today. Crucially, Raine investigates processes of identity formation and racialisation, illustrating how contemporary anti-Semitism has morphed under the neoliberal assault, with its foreclosure of alternative horizons, and today reinforces demobilisation of social struggle through conspiracy theories featuring unchallengeable, secret cabals.

Raine also touches on how the conflation of Judaism and Jewish identities with Zionism, as ideology and political movement, contributes to constructing a new Jewish identity in which Jews are cast as defenders of the Western world at home and abroad - a construction that undermines rather than protecting Jewish populations. This is not necessarily a new observation (indeed, it has been central to anti-Zionist Jewish politics from the late nineteenth century) but it is well worth stressing today once more.

Such a focus allows us to make sense of a world in which figures on the (far) right defend Israel, are celebrated by Zionist organisations as friends of the Jewish people, while simultaneously collaborating with, or actively encouraging, anti-Semitic or even fascist political actors at home. Consider, for example, the British Tory government's close relationship with Israel and simultaneous development of close political ties with the openly anti-Semitic government in Hungary, or Donald Trump's courting of both hard-line Zionists and the white-supremacist and anti-Semitic right. It also helps clarify how the historically anti-Semitic far Right across the Western world has, in recent years, reinvented itself as pro-Israel, a change starkly illustrated in the apparent generational divide within the Le Pen clan.

For all the strengths of Raine's essay, there are shortcomings. Most problematically, Raine's analysis of anti-Semitism overemphasises the phenomenon's specificity vis-à-vis other forms of oppression, while failing to identify how contemporary anti-Semitism emerges and is reproduced. His piece gives a broad overview of the ways in which anti-Semitism operates and manifests, but does not identify its structural origins. This failure tends towards a totalising view of contemporary anti-Semitism, and one which leaves little room for action by the same Left he criticises for failing to understand the current conjecture.

In fact, it seems that it is partly this lacuna that leads Raine to admonish the Left for misunderstanding what he sees as its own variation of anti-Semitism: if the construction of racism has no identifiable origin, then perhaps it might be generated by all social actors, the (often small and institutionally marginalised) Left included. His approach fails to situate anti-Semitism in relation to other forms of racism, reproducing the silo-approach of much contemporary identity politics - on both the Left and the Right - which insists on treating every form of oppression as fundamentally distinct and specific.

My analysis certainly does not contradict Raine's in toto - in fact it resonates with a great deal of the latter parts of his piece. However, key to my analysis - and lacking in Raine's - is the state. In keeping the state at the centre, not only can this account rigorously historicise the emergence of contemporary anti-Semitism, it also indicates strategic directions.

A new reading of Anti-Semitism?
In his piece, Raine's position is that anti-Semitism - in fact he often uses the word Jewophobia as a broader category, encompassing different historical expressions of hatred of Jews, including anti-Semitism - should not primarily be understood as racism. Instead, he theorises it as a 'conservative fetish' or, more specifically, 'a conservative form of subaltern consciousness, whose danger lies partly in providing a distorted frame through which to see the world, a frame inimical to meaningful human emancipation'. Following from this, he argues that the extent of real anti-Semitic feeling across society is likely much broader than is generally imagined. Anti-Semitism, for Raine, is primarily about its social function in providing an alternative reading of the world's woes, that does not threaten the status quo or real structures of exploitation and oppression, but instead projects onto Jews responsibility for the violence and poverty of the world.

There is much to agree with here. It is undeniable that conspiracy theories about Rothschilds running the world, secret cabals forcing governments to act against their own interests, or the supposed Jewish control over finance, entertainment, and media function as effective ideological tools to detract from real ruling-class power. If the problem is an unseen, 'different' and unaccountable elite, real structures of control and the system as a whole are off the hook.

But Raine does not stop there. He also appears to understand this as qualitatively different from other forms of oppression. Indeed, despite recognising that other ideological constructions play this role - consider current liberal obsessions with Russian hackers or anti-Asian racism parading as principled opposition to China's rise - Raine claims that

Raine's belief of this fundamental difference - that anti-Semitism is never only racism, unlike most of its 'more patronising' bedfellows - is never sufficiently explained, nor why the construction of Jews as 'superior' marks it out. Why is this different from, let's say, the way South Asian communities within the former British colonies in the African continent are constructed as intelligent, cunning and out to destroy local economies? Does this not also echo strongly with other so-called model minorities, such as East-Asians in North America, who are counterposed to other racialised minorities, and whose supposed industrious character, international networks, and cunning poses a threat of future domination? It seems that what these forms of racism have in common are the (real or imagined) minority status, international networks, and localisation in trade and finance of its victims.

In addition, it seems, that it is always the role of oppression to construct certain groups of - already structurally weaker - people as the physical embodiment of specific social ills. In that sense while East Asian, Jewish, or South Asian communities might be constructed as the embodiment of financial inequality, other groups are blamed for other issues: migrants destroy the welfare state, women push men out of the workplace, black people undermine the quality of education, Muslims spread violence - to name but a few.

The state constructs populations that become identified as embodied social problems; it erects them as shields behind which ruling class power can hide. The role of analysis is to understand how these identities are constructed, imposed, and why they are effective enough to gain a life of their own within society. Crucially, these different forms of oppression are also connected and constructed simultaneously by the state. The specific racialisation of East Asian communities in the US for example, plays an important role in justifying the economic deprivation of African American communities as victims not of structural racism or capitalist exploitation, but from the former's cunning economic strategies. In addition, it then also works as a justifying mechanism for state violence to supposedly protect different racialised and oppressed communities from one another.

This leads to the second issue with Raine's analysis. He never makes clear his explanation for where modern anti-Semitism originates, what structures give rise to it, and therefore - by extension - where one should focus energy to challenge it. The very movement between anti-Semitism and Jewophobia throughout the piece captures something of this lacuna. At times, Raine seems to describe a cultural phenomenon that he feels always already exists, and is not in fact constructed and imposed. As such he describes it variously as an 'unconscious phobia of Jews', 'a structure of thinking', a form of 'anti-political pessimism', and as a 'discourse', never rooting these in anything structurally identifiable. This leaves the reader with the impression that anti-Semitism can be explained by means of mere ideas, or via culture, rather than requiring a material explanation and history.

This nebulous and implied analysis of anti-Semitism, as a primarily ideological rather than material relation, also has the curious consequence of giving weight to the Rabbinical view that sees violence directed against the Jewish people as emanating from the jealousy of the gentile world of their success and blessings. Raine writes, for example that '[i]t is true that times of Jewish security and prosperity have often summoned anti-Semitism, which tells us something important about the anti-Semitic worldview'. What that 'something important' is, is not spelled out. And again: '[t]he paranoid theory of history still contains its ounce of truth. Jewish success always was the perfect catalyst for anti-Semitic thinking'. Anti-Semitism, by this account, does not seem to originate in the social contradictions of the society where it emerges from, but, at least in part, in Jewish success. An idea which would be surprising to the European Jewish masses of the nineteenth and early twentieth century to say the least. It over-emphasises anti-Semitism as a spontaneous grassroots form of hatred amongst the people, rather than identify elite and structural processes - much like contemporary discussion of 'white working-class' racism against migrants.

Raine then paints a picture of anti-Semitism as a reactionary form of subaltern consciousness, which is fundamentally distinct from other forms of oppression. In addition, it is not located in clearly identifiable material relations or structural processes. Instead, it appears in Raine's analysis as a modern form of an idealist and a-historical Jewophobia. With this lack of historical perspective, the analysis presented in his piece is not without parallels to Afro-Pessimist understanding of anti-Blackness as universal and fundamentally distinct from other racializing mechanisms.
The post-WWII state and the 'new Jew'
It was the early Zionist movement's claim that by settling Palestine and constructing agrarian communities of European Jews, it would create a so-called 'new Jew'. This 'new Jew' would cast aside what Zionists imagined to be the traits of diasporic life, and would be reborn through labour and productive contact with the land. The imagery of the new Jew as muscular, male, and both a worker and a soldier became ubiquitous in Zionist propaganda. It represented the ethos of the movement. It aimed at casting off the pariah, the weak, the parasitic, and replacing it with the conquering, the productive, and the strong. Aside from highlighting how deeply Zionism had integrated the caricatures of European anti-Semitism, it also tells an important story about its goal: the construction of a settler colonial state in Palestine was aimed at joining the European family of nations and 'normalising' the Jewish people in a way neither the Haskala's assimilation, or the radicals' revolutionary struggles could. Yet, it was not in Palestine, but in the heart of the Western world, that the identification of Jews would change drastically in the aftermath of the Nazi genocide and the creation of the Israeli state through the expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians.

Indeed, after WWII a double process took place that fundamentally transformed the way Jewish populations in the West were understood and racialised, as I have argued at greater length in 'Judaism, Zionism, and the Nazi Genocide', in Historical Materialism. If this process led to the outcome that Raine describes, it is essential to inscribe it within a series of specific state-led processes. Indeed, doing so helps making sense of current political developments, while also clarifying where activists should focus their work.

On the one hand, the Nazi genocide came to play a central role in the West's projection of self from the 1960s onwards. A specific, whitewashed version of the Holocaust - in which European anti-Semitism, its continuities with colonial racial ideologies and practices, and western support for Hitler against the threat of Bolshevism, were silenced - became a central way in which Western states narrated their own recent past. In an increasingly decolonised world, where they were forced to reckon with the horrors of colonialism abroad, and where their oppressive and exploitative treatment of the descendants of the formerly colonised at home was increasingly challenged by growing anti-racist movements, the Holocaust and its remembrance became a way for Western nations to present themselves as having changed, having learned the lessons of history, and having graduated to the status of committed anti-racism. The most striking gap between rhetoric and practice in this respect, is the annual marking by Western states of Holocaust remembrance and celebrating German reparations as crucial aspects of accounting for and repairing the crimes of the past, while continuing to refuse to acknowledge (let alone atone for and repair) the full-extend (and contemporary relevance) of human, cultural, and material destruction wrought by their colonial regimes and slave trading economies across the Global South.

Moreover, the fact that this remembrance was, at the very least, unwilling to recognise the depth of active support for the Nazis and the widespread anti-Semitism within European and North American ruling classes is very telling about the limited nature of this process. It also helps make sense of current events, where Macron can celebrate Marshal Petain's role in leading France to victory in WWI or British pundits can react with outrage to the students who occupied a Churchill themed café in London, without either men's racism or anti-Semitism getting in the way of the national narrative of pride and memory. In his excellent The End of Jewish Modernity, Enzo Traverso argues that the commemoration of the Holocaust has become central to Western nation's civic religions. It has become a cornerstone of their image of self - as liberal, egalitarian, and just - conveniently avoiding structural changes and a broader reckoning with the real history of Western power across the world, of which Jews as well as formerly colonised and enslaved people bore the brunt. Aimé Césaire, the father of the Negritude movement, already pointed out in the 1950s that Nazism could not be understood without being re-inscribed in the global history of European colonisation.

This process of re-directed recognition went hand in hand with the increasingly central role played by Israel in Western foreign policy in the Middle East. In fact, recognition of the horrors of the Nazi genocide was mobilised to justify and explain the military, economic, and diplomatic support to Israel and - by extension - Western foreign policy in the region. It continues to play this role today. It is bitterly significant that the German state was allowed to 'repay' the Jewish people through financial and military deals with Israel, helping the young state expand its control over land and intensify its exclusion of its indigenous inhabitants, while Holocaust survivors continued to live in poverty and isolation both in Europe and Israel.

Simultaneously, it became clear to the United States, and by extension the rest of the Western world, that Nasser's Egypt and other Arab nationalist governments would not join Washington in its efforts to contain the USSR. They then turned fully towards supporting Israel against these regimes. The 1967 war sealed this alliance and made Israel central to US strategy in the region, first in order to defeat Arab nationalist states militarily, and then later to impose their political and economic integration into its sphere of influence. This relationship continues to this day through economic deals signed across the Middle East and North Africa, in which normalisation with Israel continues to be a central way for the US to institutionalise the region's regimes' subservience to its rule (see for example Adam Hanieh's excellent discussion of this process in his Lineages of Revolt).

Jewish people, in the process, found themselves increasingly catapulted out of the position of being essentialised as a population living at the margins of the nation state and identified with communist revolution, and essentialised instead as the gatekeepers of Western legitimacy at home and abroad. They were increasingly cast, by Western states, as the defenders of the legitimacy of the Western world when facing the Global South, as well as Black and Asian populations at home. Jews became the shield behind which the Western states hid when faced with demands of anti-racist and anti-imperialist movements.

This change was highly attractive to the leadership of an oppressed community that saw in this new paradigm a route towards integration and acceptance within elite circles, which had remained, until then, closed off to them. It is striking for example that it is in the early to mid-1970s that AIPAC became a major player in US politics - that is after the US has become Israel's key imperial sponsor. Norman Finkelstein, in his Knowing too Much, points out that the official Jewish leadership in the US became attached to Zionism in the post 1967 period, because it was a way to integrate into the American political elite. They therefore become Zionists as loyal American citizens, rather than as separatist Jewish organisations. Simultaneously, a new cultural image of the 'tough Jew' emerged in American life. Echoing the 'new Jew' of the Zionist movement in pre-1948 Palestine, it focussed on Jewish gangsters, occupying soldiers, and the right for the modern Jew, in the words of Rich Cohen, 'to be a bully'.

This logic, which understands liberation as based on closeness to state-power rather than through the transformation of existing power structures, so common amongst the elites of oppressed communities, is strikingly applicable to the official Muslim institutions today. However, much like its Jewish counterpart in the 1920s and 1930s it has little enticing to bring to the table for the vast majority of the community under attack. David Rosenberg's brilliant Battle for the East End shows how the Board of Deputies' response to growing anti-Semitism in pre-War Britain was one focussed on respectability and a desperate attempt to win favour with those (often anti-Semites) in power. As such the militant responses by Jewish activists who (successfully) organised mass resistance against the British Union of Fascists in the streets were seen as a threat to that strategy. This tension continues to have important ramifications today.

While structurally Jewish life has changed considerably - Jews are no longer structurally discriminated against in socio-economic terms - the focus on closeness to state power by community leaders continues to put their base at risk. Indeed, it normalises the narratives that equate Jews and Zionism/Israel, participates in the state-led strategy of pitting Jews against other racialised groups (primarily Muslims), and closes its eyes on ruling class normalisation of anti-Semitism. The refusal of the BoD in Britain for example to challenge the Conservative government's normalisation of fascist leaders in Hungary or Johnson's close ties with Bannon, or the defence by prominent Jewish organisations in the US of Trump are powerful examples of this tendency.

This is important because what this analysis of the changing racialization of Jews in the West does, is avoid limiting itself to a quasi-conspiratorial approach, which obsesses over the behaviour of the leadership of Zionist Jewish organisations (see for example The Israel Lobby by John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt), nor does it locate anti-Semitism within ill-defined narrative processes. Instead it reflects on the structures of the state that have created the current political logic within which those organisations operate. It is the change in their states' strategy - at home and abroad - that has led to a change of status of Jewish people in the West, rather than the other way around. Ironically, this makes their newly acquired status precarious and dependent on the continuation of the current political order.

It helps to make sense of why the assault on the Corbyn-led Labour Party or on the Palestine solidarity movement, on the basis of its supposed institutionally anti-Semitic nature (despite continuous failure to evince anything beyond anecdotal evidence for this claim) has been so effective, because it plays into a narrative which has been central to the policies of Western governments for decades. Jewish communities are only extended access to limited assimilation by the state when it identifies them as extensions of Zionism and/or Israel. Therefore, they can also be used as shields behind which the state hides when Zionism and/or Israel are threatened. Similarly, when Jewish groups or individuals reject Zionism, the state can ignore them, as they do not fit the assimilationist mould.

The question is not whether there has been a concerted effort to attack on these fronts, which has involved the Israel lobby. This much is evident and has been documented extensively, including on camera by Al-Jazeera 'The Lobby' documentaries in both the US and the UK. Nor is the question whether some have engaged in good fate in those campaigns. They undoubtedly have. The question instead is about the effectiveness of these campaigns. Its success should not be laid at the door of the lobby itself and its supposed extraordinary power - with all the worrying undertones that come with it - but understood as rooted in the fact that the attack cleaves in the same political direction as the ideology of Western states: mobilise Jewish populations as shields behind which to hide Western crimes and racism at home and abroad. This is the nature of modern anti-Semitism. It is on this basis that it should be fought.

This approach also helps make sense of how governments in France, Britain, or the US - amongst others - simultaneously move to criminalise Palestine solidarity activism (all three states have taken steps to outlaw BDS, and Macron has recently announced his desire to legally equate anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism) under the guise of protecting Jewish communities at home, while simultaneously normalising the anti-Semitic far-right. All three governments entertain, for example, friendly relations with the openly anti-Semitic government of Hungary. In the UK, it is particularly worrying that Boris Johnson has close ties with the anti-Semitic Steve Bannon, specifically in the latter's attempts to unify the European far-right, while presenting himself as a friend and protector of the Jewish people.

The burden of protecting Western states is pushed onto Jewish communities. The 'new Jew' so desired by the early Zionist movement has emerged in the West. He (he is always a he) is constructed as a defender of the state and the West's interests in the Middle East. He is counterpoised to racialised communities at home who fight for their political liberation. In the process, Jewish communities, as well as the racialised groups they are pitted against by state policy - Muslims and Palestinians primarily - are continuously put in danger in the process. It is therefore not surprising that there is such a strong victimising narrative emerging from Zionist circles. This is not only a political strategy by pro-Israeli organisation. It is also a reality. Ironically, by drawing Jewish communities nearer to the state and constructing them as an extension of their policies, Western states are laying down the basis for the victimisation of Jewish communities.
Bringing Back Political Agency
David Feldman and Brendan McGeever of the Pears Institute for the Study of Anti-Semitism have repeatedly observed, in the public 'debates' of recent months, a split between the struggle against anti-Semitism and the wider anti-racist movement. They have not, however, provided a plausible explanation for this crucial observation (though in fact in one article - which they inexplicably chose to publish in the Israeli press - they seem to point the finger of blame for this at the British anti-racist movement).

The foregoing analysis might go some way to addressing this, and point to a possible direction to challenge it.

The contemporary struggle against anti-Semitism cannot be waged without the state in its focus, nor can it be effective without demanding that the fate of Jewish communities be disentangled from Western states, their foreign policy and the continuation of Israeli settler-colonialism. It must be a unitary struggle against the racialisation of all communities, through which the murderous history of the West can be acknowledged, and the ongoing structures of oppression rooted in this past can be dismantled - to the benefit of all oppressed communities. This includes Jews, who still find themselves collectively defined and identified by the state - to their detriment - in the ways laid out above. In this sense, not only is anti-Zionism not in contradiction with the struggle against anti-Semitism, as our rulers would have us believe, but it is inextricable from it. No one is free, as the saying goes, until we all are.

While the 'official' voices of the Jewish community can often make it seem like this strategy is an impossibility, a flurry of Jewish groups - from Jewish Voice for Peace and the more recent 'Never Again is Now' movement in the US, to the Jewish Network for Palestinians and Jewdas in the UK, among many others - have already started making it a reality. Similarly, every major poll within the Jewish population in the West shows a growing disengagement from Israel amongst young Jews. The task of the Left is to intensify its opposition to the colonisation of Palestine, to the violence meted out against black, Muslim, migrant, and all other racialised peoples. It simultaneously needs to understand that the state's attempt to counterpose Jewish people to these struggles is inextricable from the contemporary nature of anti-Semitism. It must be fought relentlessly. To do so effectively however, those struggling must identify the state as their target and mobilise accordingly.

While much of the historical focus in analyses of anti-Semitism is on Eastern and Central Europe - and for good reason given the specific history of European states with Ashkenazi Jewish communities and their diaspora - there is work to be done on the history of Jewish communities' relation with Europe in colonial contexts. It is striking for example that all the while oppressing Jews at home, the French state granted citizenship to Jewish Algerians, who were thereby given access to French education, better employment opportunities, and semi-integration into colonial society. In so doing, it constructed an intermediary community between itself and the 'indigenes' that could be erected as a shield behind which it could hide. The failure of communist and nationalist activists to win over Jewish Algerians to the project of building an independent Algerian state and to abandon their inclusion into the French state led to the effective destruction, through exile, of the Algerian Jewish community. It also contributed to the emergence of a very limited vision of the identity of the newly independent Algerian state, something that remains a major issue today for non-Arabs and non-Muslims in the country. This state of affairs resonates strongly with the present analysis of contemporary anti-Semitism offered in this article. It also serves as a reminder of the strategic importance of identifying state strategies and structures of identification effectively, in order to lead successful, unifying, liberation struggles from below.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Recentring the State: A Response to Barnaby Raine on Anti-Semitism

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
With ongoing smear campaigns against the Palestine solidarity movement as organised as they are cynical, and with the genuine growth of anti-Semitic violence - alongside growing racist attacks across the board - grappling seriously with anti-Semitism is of great strategic importance.

# data[].attributes.headline
FAULT LINES IN THE FIGHT AGAINST RACISM AND ANTISEMITISM

# data[].attributes.subject
FAULT LINES IN THE FIGHT AGAINST RACISM AND ANTISEMITISM

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
January 30, 2020 - Comment

Written by Liz Fekete
The government's bifurcated approach to racial equality is deepening fissures in our movements with anti-racism emerging as a key site of struggle
Those of us who have contributed to the anti-racist movement for decades have been left demoralised by the 'debate' about racism and antisemitism both prior to and during the general election. Academic, author and veteran of the black struggle, Gus John resigned from the Church of England's advisory board on ethnic minority issues over the Archbishop of Canterbury's endorsement of the Chief Rabbi's comments on the Labour Party's antisemitism, which he considered partial and hypocritical, given the impact of the 'hostile environment' on the 'Windrush generation' and the church's woeful record of fighting racism in all its forms.
Narrowing the meaning
For veterans of the anti-racist struggle, the narrowing media narrative of what constitutes racism, and the way accusations of it are kicked around by politicians and journalists who have no anti-racist track record, can make us despair. For those of us faced with countering what Sivanandan described as 'the racism that kills', it now feels that the nature of anti-racism itself - what it is, and what it is not - has emerged as the key site of struggle. The racism that Sivanandan highlighted, over four decades of struggle in the UK, was structural (not personal), and involved state and institutional power. It would necessitate rallying around the most vulnerable and marginalised sections of society and not the well-to-do, who had some means of protection and of redress.
Hate crime and anti-extremism frameworks
The recent revelation that anti-racist and anti-fascist groups, as well as police monitoring groups and the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, are amongst those listed as extremist in a Counter-Terrorism Policing document distributed to, amongst others, several government departments, Ofsted, prison, police, probation services and twenty local authorities as part of Prevent anti-extremism briefings, is a warning of a dangerous bifurcated approach to racial equality that is developing. The fight against individual bigotry, and a generalised condemnation of 'hate', especially when manifested online, is acceptable. But a more expansive anti-racism - most powerful when it is internationally-focused and cross-community, and most persuasive when tailored towards specific interventions around, for instance, immigration laws, school exclusions, housing policies, racialised policing and media frameworks - is not. A strategy that solely homes in on 'hate' and 'bigotry' creates a competitive environment (wherein groups compete for recognition, resources, etc) that then militates against unity in action. And it also erases the varied ways in which Black and Brown communities, Muslims, Jews, new refugee and migrant communities, Roma, Gypsies and Travellers, experience structural racism and institutional failure, not least in the policing of 'hate crimes'. To put it simply, this new modified view over-simplifies racism. It fixates on questions of individual bias (often unconscious) and apparently overt hate (often online or in interpersonal settings), thereby personalising racism. In the public sphere this becomes a spat, which allows racism to be turned into a media spectacle, completely obscuring the diligent but less eye-catching work carried out by organisations combating the structural racism that emanates from government policy, the law, and the instrumental logic and culture of organisations.

What we are seeing today, through the ways in which racism has been redefined solely as personal hate, prejudice and bigotry is a process of erasure and dispossession. The historical experiences of BAME communities in this country are being jettisoned, leading to a process whereby we are all being dispossessed of the collective lessons we have learnt over several decades about the structures in society that perpetuate racism and hence the nature of the fight needed.
Undermining of international solidarity
As the official definition narrows to the individual, the immediate and the domestic, we are also witnessing another dangerous erasure, that of our internationally focused anti-racist traditions, which, over the years, has taken in the fight against apartheid in South Africa, the US civil rights and Black Power, anti-colonial fights, especially in Vietnam and later Africa, and support for the Palestinians, either living for decades under the deprivations of occupation by Israel or as refugees and exiles in the UK. That this international aspect of our anti-racist fight is now being criminalised is most clearly seen in the listing in the Prevent document of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign as an extremist organisation, a listing all the more obtuse given the legitimacy of Palestinian solidarity work given through scores of UN resolutions condemning Israel for the illegal occupation of Palestinian land, and the illegal buildings of civilian settlements on land taken by force. For anti-racists, for whom the fight against all forms of racism (whether anti-Black, anti-Jewish, or anti-Arab) is indivisible, it was our commitment to free speech on Palestine that led us to raise concerns about some of the contentious examples attached to the Holocaust Committee (IHRA) definition of antisemitism (which has been criticised as a threat to free speech even by Kenneth Stern, the man who formulated it). We were concerned that the extended definition would once again lead to a process of erasure and dispossession. And it now seems that the fractious debate around the IHRA has provided something of an alibi for the targeting of PSC as an extremist organisation. The Palestinian diaspora in the UK is being dispossessed of the right to interpret their experience of the Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands, even as the diversity of Jewish opinion in the UK is denied, leading to the stereotyping and denigration of dissentient voices of Jewish socialists and Jewish anti-Zionists, who are in danger of being pilloried as 'fringe Jews'.
The shrinking space for anti-racism
But we need to go further than just bemoan the various erasures described above. We need to historically contextualise the threat it poses to anti-racism and the way it is depriving BAME people of agency.

The space for anti-racism is shrinking fast - but this hasn't just happened through the way that racism and antisemitism became political footballs during the election, it has been happening cumulatively, over decades. If we can understand this it will be easier to embrace strategies that don't inadvertently nurture the new narrative but resist it.

Anti-racism, embedded in multicultural, internationally-focused communities of resistance, poses a threat to our neoliberal establishment that abandons whole communities to market forces. What could be a greater challenge to state neglect of impoverished communities, than ordinary people forming solidarity movements that cut across divides of race and class?
Professionalising the political
Since at least the time of Tony Blair, successive governments have pursued neoliberal economic policies which have led to a shrinking of the size of the welfare state. A new form of governance has been engendered where the state governs not so much vertically but horizontally - through the co-option of Third Sector organisations into 'marketised service delivery' or Samaritan-style victim support. This has had profound implications for the fight against racism, as well as our ability to build unity in action across the race and class divides. Whereas before it was grassroots groups, with perhaps the support of local authority-supported small voluntary organisations, setting the agenda on racial justice, now we have multi-agency hate crime panels and anti-extremism bodies which are a mixture of private, state and Third Sector organisations. Their multi-agency nature, closeness to government and law enforcement, neutralises campaigns, for example their ability to criticise the police and the CPS's response to racist violence or criminalisation of BAME communities, let alone state policies that foster racism. And, ultimately, this multi-agency 'professionalised' industry leads to the delegitimisation of social movements that take a more transformative, radical approach, shrinking also the space for independent civil society actors, who can find themselves starved of resources by risk-averse funders who have internalised the state's securitisation agenda and/or take the easier option of supporting those larger well-funded NGOs which appear to have greater access to power.

As I pointed out, the idea that racism is simply expressions of hate and bigotry, ie, 'actions' carried out, often online, by damaged individuals who have a propensity to imbibe conspiracy theories, is dominant today. But we also need to understand that this is linked to the role that government-funded hate crime and counter-extremism 'industries' play in our society in defining what racism and anti-racism are; in the process locking out from the discussion all those who campaign against the structural racism that exists in the social sphere.

This structural racism also influences our popular culture, determining the frameworks that the media adopt when reporting on issues of racism, which is again reduced to prejudice or perception of prejudice. What we are witnessing today, argues Nesrine Malik, is a media pantomime in which every black or brown person 'summoned to perform their part', defending Stormzy's take on racism or Meghan Markle, for instance, are met by interviewers or pundits who ridicule them, imply that they are over-sensitive or ungrateful, they take offence too easily, don't understand satire (Johnson), or, in the case of Muslims, are using racism to promote their own type of totalitarian agenda. And invariably, a cabinet spokesperson like Priti Patel or Sajid Javid pops up, to reinforce the government line that there is no such thing as institutional racism, just prejudice. It really feels like the place for intelligent debate is shrinking, and that we've gone back decades, to the 1950s when Asian and Afro-Caribbean people's complaints about racism were met with 'you've got a chip on your shoulder', or 'you can't take a joke', or 'it's only natural to fear strangers', responses. Some now question whether, if we respond to the likes of actor Laurence Fox's Question Time comments, we aid a process where nonentities who crave media attention are transformed into media celebrities and, if inadvertently, become poster boys and girls of the far Right.
The system of denial
This newly minted orthodoxy as to what constitutes racism is hard to counter. But if we start seeing it as less of a narrative and more as a system of denial that appears to be hardwired into the government's way of thinking on race, we may be able to avoid a situation of being constantly on the defensive. To put it simply, institutional racism today is held in place by policies, institutions and government spokespeople that deny it exists at all - and this is part and parcel of a new common-sense racism held in situ by place people in the media, in the counter-extremism 'industries', and, most significantly, in the very institutions meant to protect us by fighting discrimination and upholding equality. Paradoxically, understanding this as structural and part of official thinking on 'race', can open up ways to fight it. We can ask why, for instance, some government appointees to top posts deny the existence of institutional racism in their fields, or conversely, like the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), redefine institutional racism in ways that reduce it to a series of incidents, thereby rendering it meaningless. We can demand that parliamentarians and people who head quangos uphold good 'race relations' and put them on inquiry should they perpetuate racist stereotypes themselves.
The enforcers
For instance, two of the government's top appointees to investigate antisemitism have downplayed or contributed to anti-Gypsy racism, for which they have made no apology.

John Mann, the former Labour MP for Bassetlaw Notts and recently appointed antisemitism tsar, was interviewed in 2016 by police investigating a possible hate crime over an 'anti-social behaviour notebook' that specifically targeted Gypsies and Travellers.[i]

The UK's special envoy for post-Holocaust issues, former communities secretary, Eric Pickles, was accused of reinforcing the anti-Gypsy perspectives of the Express group from 2008-2010. Appointed envoy in 2015, he had previously been the architect of planning policies for Travellers' sites which attempted to erase Gypsy, Traveller, Romany (GTR) identity and curb their traditional way of life through a new definition of GTR for planning purposes. Pickles also came under strong criticism for his chairmanship of the Ministerial Working Group for Gypsies and Travellers, which, under the coalition government, was tasked with governmental co-ordination of the EU Roma Framework (whereby all member states were meant to implement a strategy for Roma integration). The committee, which was comprised solely of civil servants, had no GTR representation. Following a freedom of information request by Friends, Families and Travellers, it was established that the MWG had not met in two-and-a-half years, which speaks volumes of Pickles' commitment to issues of the Roma, who he seems to have forgotten were also victims of the Holocaust, with Ian Hancock suggesting that as many as 1.5 million of Europe's 2 million Roma population were killed.

Other government appointees have a track record of interventions that can be seen as reinforcing Islamophobia.

Amanda Spielman, head of Ofsted, has directed inspectors to question Muslim girls who wear the headscarf in primary schools, saying the hijab could be a sign of 'sexualisation'. She has also supported a primary school head teacher who attempted to ban the hijab (later overturned by governors). In a heavily trailed speech at a Church of England conference, Spielman urged school leaders to use 'muscular liberalism' to defend decisions, rather than adopting a 'passive liberalism' for 'fear of causing offence'.

Lord Edward Faulks is a former Tory minister and a long-established working Tory peer who resigned the whip on the day of his controversial appointment as head of the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO), which he took over in the New Year. In a Spectator article written in April 2019 entitled 'Adopting the new Islamophobia definition would be terrible for the Tories', Lord Faulks argued that the definition of Islamophobia proposed by an All Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslims would inhibit those seeking to criticise British Muslims, that people were already too frightened to challenge Muslims, for fear of being called racists, and ended up appearing to endorse the association of London mayor Sadiq Khan with Islamic extremism.

Britain's Black Caribbean communities face widespread discrimination and racist stereotyping and yet their experience of structural racism, particularly in school exclusions and mental health, is being erased. According to research published in Educational Review, Black Caribbean pupils are nearly four times more likely to receive a permanent exclusion than the school population as a whole, and twice as likely to receive a fixed-period exclusion.

Tom Bennett was appointed as the government's bad behaviour tsar after the Department for Education announced £10 million for a crackdown on bad behaviour in schools. Bennett describes any link between US-style zero-tolerance behaviour policies that he supports, and increased school exclusions, as not evidence-based and mere hearsay. He has supported the Royal Docks Academy's strict discipline guide which advises that teachers can give detentions to pupils who are missing equipment, challenge decisions by rolling their eyes, or 'kiss teeth', much of which has been criticised by education expert David Gilborn as racially biased.[ii] Bennett also seems set on a collision course with the Children's Commissioner for England and Wales and the Centre for Mental Health charity, which have both warned that accommodating 'disruptive' children, sometimes for minor uniform breaches or the wrong hairstyle, in isolation booths could put such young people's mental health at risk.

Swaran Singh, a Commissioner at the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) until at least September 2019, who is also a professor of psychiatry at Warwick University, was appointed in January 2020 to chair the Conservative party's review of its handling of discrimination complaints. Singh believes that racism is a contested term, and has written an academic paper for the British Medical Journal denying the role institutional racism plays in diagnoses for mental illness and psychosis in second generation Afro-Caribbean patients. He describes the term 'institutional racism' as 'vague' 'meaningless' and 'insulting' and accuses those who make 'accusations of racism' of putting the welfare of BAME communities at risk by feeding into their 'alienation and mistrust of services'. For such conclusions he was praised by Charles Moore in the for establishing that 'Family breakdown is more common in Afro-Caribbean families than in many Asian ones and is also related to psychotic illness'. One can only wonder why Singh, who has controversial views on India and Kashmir, was appointed a Commissioner at the EHRC in the first place.

It is also worth noting here the mixed credentials of the current EHRC. In 2017, leading academics and race equality campaigners warned that its 'credibility, authority and legitimacy' within black and Asian communities had been damaged by the fact that under a programme of cuts, BAME staff were allegedly targeted for compulsory redundancies, with critics also pointing to its failure to appoint BAME personnel to senior positions. And, though the EHRC has been focussed and outspoken in its report on breaches to the right to life and violations of the public sector equality duty in relation to Grenfell, its recent report on racial harassment in universities has been savaged by Kehinde Andrews for reducing structural racism to a series of incidents. Journalist Phil Miller has suggested that more scrutiny is needed of an organisation whose chair and one of its commissioners are linked to a city law firm that advises the government.
Reclaiming anti-racism
If we are to revitalise anti-racism and create unity between all communities under threat, it is vital that we don't get over-defensive, but start to fight back. We need to lead by example. There are plenty of organisations fighting structural racism, and our job at IRR News and in Race & Class is to amplify their voices. And when it comes to fighting racial violence, we need to recognise that the Brexit debate has deepened divisions in society to such an extent that for an army of far-right activists any 'difference' is now perceived as threatening. They are targeting mosques, synagogues, Black, Muslim, Jewish, Gay, Roma, disabled and LGBTQ targets alike. For the fight against racism and the fight against antisemitism to fracture at this particular point in our history is calamitous. But while bridges need to be built between all communities under threat, this can only be done in a principled way that does not cement, but recognises and counters the divide and rule policies of the government's bifurcated approach to racial justice.

The highly professionalised and well-funded multi-agency counter-extremism and hate-crime 'industries' have turned the focus away from collective struggles against racism in all its forms, to concentrate on a narrow struggle against prejudice, hate and bigotry, or a vacuous struggle against extremism which ends up treating the Left and Right as equal carriers of extremism. Social media has opened the door to everyone's prejudices hanging out, and also allows for everyone's history to be invoked. It's vital that the anti-racist movement, if it is to survive, does not go down the road of the increasing personalising of racism and limit its activities to moral outrage about who tweeted what or even retweeted what. Anti-racism as a practice is not about finger-pointing or virtue-signalling; it is about building a momentum in society which remakes racial justice.

1. [i] The issue of this 'offensive booklet' was subsequently raised by the Traveller Movement and the René Cassin foundation prior to a proposed three-way parliamentary group meeting to discuss racism against Gypsies and Travellers which then collapsed when the APPG on antisemitism, chaired by Mann, 'cancelled with no explanation'.

2. [ii] Other experts have said the policy - which gives students penalties of 30-minute, one-hour or two-hour detentions depending on what they have done - is racially biased, as it awards the harshest penalty of two hours for pupils 'kissing teeth', equating this with bullying, truancy and theft.

The Institute of Race Relations is precluded from expressing a corporate view: any opinions expressed are therefore those of the authors.

Comments

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Fault lines in the fight against racism and antisemitism

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
January 30, 2020 - Comment Written by Liz Fekete The government's bifurcated approach to racial equality is deepening fissures in our movements with anti-racism emerging as a key site of struggle Those of us who have contributed to the anti-racist movement for decades have been left demoralised by the 'debate' about racism and antisemitism both prior to and during the general election.

# data[].attributes.headline
From management meetings to meaningful change: risks of institutional capture in the decolonisation of UK higher education and recommendations for delivering structural change

# data[].attributes.subject
From management meetings to meaningful change: risks of institutional capture in the decolonisation of UK higher education and recommendations for delivering structural change

# data[].attributes.body
Dr Rima Saini

August 11th, 2020

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As there are growing calls from below, alongside expanding formal initiatives, to decolonise universities, Dr Rima Saini outlines what decolonisation means in the higher education context. She highlights that it is a radical project of institutional transformation that lies in exposing and upturning the colonial underpinnings of our universities. Given the immensity of this task, Saini explores the risks of institutional capture - that structural change will be absorbed into management strategies- and offers recommendations for meaningful change.
The anti-racist protests that followed the killing of George Floyd in May have brought longstanding issues of structural racisms into sharp focus. In many UK universities, this has resulted in a nascent or renewed sense of commitment to the decolonisation of the curriculum - in a number of cases coming from senior university management. Indeed, in recent months, despite the tumult of the COVID-19 pandemic and the retreat of our in-person spaces of action to predominantly online fora, conversations around decolonisation have continued and in places flourished. For those of us living with, and/or researching, racial marginality and Whiteness in a higher education system that has long been problematic or inactive on matters of race, however, efforts from 'above' have been met with a healthy dose of scepticism.

What is decolonisation in Higher Education?

Decolonisation in higher education is primarily concerned with the unacknowledged coloniality of academic knowledge and practice. It entails a structural and cultural change in the way universities think about the representation and the uplift of historically silenced voices. This is particularly relevant to the treatment of racially marginalised staff and students, and the way in which our pedagogy - across all disciplines - acknowledges the legitimacy of, and sufficiently reflects, frameworks of thought beyond the Western canon. Decolonisation thus cannot be applied singularly to the curriculum or to the attainment gap. It feeds into, amongst other things, the very structure of the university, the experiences of students, staff and wider publics, knowledge creation and outputs, and stymied institutional cultures and mind-sets.

Decolonisation thus cannot be applied singularly to the curriculum or to the attainment gap. It feeds into, amongst other things, the very structure of the university, the experiences of students, staff and wider publics, knowledge creation and outputs, and stymied institutional cultures and mind-sets.

Given the immensity of this undertaking, however, discussions and initiatives that have taken place under the banner of decolonisation have regularly fallen short of addressing the structural and cultural roots of coloniality in higher education. One example is the subsumption of decolonial praxis into the considerably tamer and less weighty 'equality and diversity' discourse. There have also been longstanding issues with, as I stated earlier this year in Political Quarterly, encouraging colleagues and managers to discuss - with appropriate rigour - the meaning and relevance of decolonisation in relation to their own positionalities and practice. As a result, institutional capture - the process by which demands for structural change get absorbed into already existing management policies-of the decolonisation framework, is a reality.

As conversations around decolonisation in universities are being afforded greater urgency, some key risks of this institutional capture or inertia to wider decolonisation efforts are outlined below:

Institutional capture: risks and recommendations
Risk 1. 'Diversity' supplanting 'decolonisation'
The language of decolonisation seems, in recent years but especially at this moment, to have proliferated in network meetings, steering groups, and task forces, platforms where the realities of White supremacy, privilege and fragility have been rarely touched upon. This might be cause for celebration, but this mainstreaming of decolonisation runs the risk of diluting and indeed capturing decolonisation within Eurocentric boundary making practices. Unspecific and un-actioned expressions of anti-racist support re-shifts the onus for curriculum overhaul, for example, onto predominantly non-White scholar activists. This reproduces racial hierarchies by placing the burden of proof and labour onto those who suffer most from institutional racism. Decolonisation which becomes redefined and redeployed through a non-threatening white gaze also serves to side-line the often more meaningful and impactful grassroots efforts of longstanding staff and student networks within universities to generate sorely needed funding and recognition.
Risk 2. Ideological pacification
Many current institutional approaches to equality, diversity and inclusion lack a framework for genuine transformation. They tend to pay lip service to social difference or 'diversities' within higher education institutions, largely for the profit-centred means of attracting international student recruitment. They often fail to link these explicitly to a critical reimagining of current higher education systems that is genuinely inclusive, with a focus on those who are acutely marginalised and silenced. At the very least, a 'diverse' student body requires a commitment to ensuring equal attainment across students from different backgrounds, and an adequate representation of minority staff. However, data from the Higher Education Statistics Authority states that as of 2018/2019 less than 1 per cent of university employees at professorial or senior academic level are Black ( compared to just over 3 per cent as a percentage of the population at large as of the 2011 census), alongside the existence of a persistent attainment gap between Black and White students particularly. As Tom Conford stated in a blog post last year on anti-racism in theatre studies, ' the diversity of 'diverse' categories begins to suggest that everyone could be considered in some way 'diverse', which obscures rather than exposes inequalities'.

At the very least, a 'diverse' student body requires a commitment to ensuring equal attainment across students from different backgrounds and an adequate representation of minority staff.
Recommendation 1. Embracing discomfort
As alluded to thus far, decolonisation is inherently disruptive, destabilising and non-linear. Efforts to streamline and formalise the process more often than not prove reductive. Facing discomfort with an open mind and encouraging others to do the same through humility and active listening is key. Seminal postcolonial theorist Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak famously asked 'Can the Subaltern Speak?' but noted that perhaps less crucial than 'who will speak' is 'who will listen'. Maintaining firm lines on minimum expected institutional efforts - whether a university-wide re-haul of inherently racialised recruitment and promotion practices or substantial investment and innovation in training beyond 'unconscious bias' sessions - is difficult when institutions have a history of maintaining the status quo through either largescale silencing or the means of ideological pacification discussed earlier.
Recommendation 2. Trying to move beyond the curriculum
Most university staff looking towards decolonisation would acknowledge that a quantitative approach to diversifying reading list is, in and of itself, insufficient in addressing the historical misrepresentation and side-lining of non-Western and non-White theoretical and methodological traditions. However, this does little to preclude the fact that such changes are seen as more 'do-able' and regularly become the first port of call in decolonisation efforts. It is important then, that decolonising the curriculum does not become the aim for decolonial efforts in HE, at the expense of the more profound pedagogical efforts needed to decolonise our classrooms. Frank, open and often uncomfortable conversations about the realities of racial and postcolonial trauma inside and outside the walls of the institution go a long way to destabilising institutional hierarchies beyond the scope of the reading list. Creating spaces of intellectual autonomy and recognition for those with marginalised histories, all while fostering a sense of ' engaged pedagogy' that values, as bell hooks advocates, care and mutual respect, is as important as other curriculum-orientated modes of decolonisation work.

Conclusion

The mainstreaming of discussions around decolonising the university represents a potential turning point in UK Higher Education. However, if decolonisation is to avoid becoming a new buzzword, space needs to be made for difficult conversations to be aired. For those of us living with, and/or researching, racial marginality and Whiteness in the higher education system, this requires a strong dose of caution in order that easy solutions or quick-fixes don't capture the promise of the present moment.
Note: This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of the LSE Impact Blog, nor of the London School of Economics. Please review our comments policy if you have any concerns on posting a comment below Image Credit: Dylan Gillis via unsplash (meeting)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
From management meetings to meaningful change: risks of institutional capture in the decolonisation of UK higher education and recommendations for delivering structural change

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As there are growing calls from below, alongside expanding formal initiatives, to decolonise universities, Dr Rima Saini outlines what decolonisation means in the higher education context. She highlights that it is a radical project of institutional transformation that lies in exposing and upturning the colonial underpinnings of our universities.

# data[].attributes.headline
Our Future Now Anti-Racism Resource List

# data[].attributes.subject
Our Future Now Anti-Racism Resource List

# data[].attributes.headline
Equality and Human Rights Commission - Tackling racial harassment: Universities challenged 

# data[].attributes.subject
Equality and Human Rights Commission - Tackling racial harassment: Universities challenged 

# data[].attributes.headline
Community Accountability and Racial Justice

# data[].attributes.subject
Community Accountability and Racial Justice

# data[].attributes.body
An antiracism for abolitionist times: This UCU webinar looks at the role education institutions play in perpetuating racism. Community accountability seeks to transform education from a system of state racism to a community resource. Join Gargi Bhattacharyya, NUS President Larissa Kennedy and Ümit Yildiz as we map out an organising plan to create a process of ongoing community accountability.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Community Accountability and Racial Justice

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Leeds Beckett University has set a dangerous precedent by publicly severing its links with Aysha Khanom, founder of the Race Trust, following a Twitter controversy.
At the centre of the controversy that led to the severing of all ties with its adviser Khanom by Leeds Beckett University, which hosts the Centre for Race, Education and Decoloniality, lies an attempt by far-right websites and cultural conservatives to link the use by people of colour of the term 'house Negro' to the N-word, though their historical and etymological roots are different, as we set out to explain below. The campaign against the Race Trust, an educational project that mentors young people of colour in Manchester, came after a social media troll, using a false identity and a stolen photograph, targeted Khanom, pretending to be sympathetic to the Race Trust's goals, but subsequently releasing her private messages to far-right news outlets The Point (run by Turning Point UK) and VoteWatch.
Background to the controversy
The story begins on 14 February 2021, when Professor of Black Studies in the School of Social Sciences at Birmingham City University Kehinde Andrews, and Calvin Robinson, strategy and policy adviser to the Reclaim Party, went on BBC's Big Questions to discuss whether Britain has made progress on racism. Kehinde Andrews is associated with the Critical Race Theory (CRT) academic field of study, which the British government, following the lead of Donald Trump, has announced it is ' unequivocally against'. Calvin Robinson, senior fellow at Policy Exchange and apparently currently consultant for the Department of Education, describes Critical Race Theory as pernicious - a form of race baiting that is peddled by anti-racists who are the 'new racists'. Robinson's view is that Britain, 'the most tolerant, the most diverse, multicultural society in the world', is now post-racial, real anti-racists being 'colour blind'. In contrast, racists ('racist grifters', Robinson calls them) are those who persist in using the language of race in public. In this view he builds on the policy goals of the Reclaim Party, which has been described by a Westminster source as ' UKIP for culture'. Reclaim was created by Laurence Fox, an actor who has gained something of a reputation for opposing the use of terms like 'white privilege' which he sees in personal terms as an assault on him (and all white people) based on their skin colour. Fox also opposes 'forced diversity', and in one notorious incident called for a boycott of Sainsbury's after it announced its support for Black History Month.

Calvin Robinson, like Fox and various government ministers such as Priti Patel and Kemi Badenoch, has also been at the forefront of attacks not just on Critical Race Theory, but on Black Lives Matter. Like Patel and Badenoch, Robinson is from an ethnic minority background, though he objects to being so labelled, saying he is ' just British ' but if he is forced to a description he would prefer 'half-caste' as 'the most accurate' description of his identity. All three have come under strong criticism from organisations and institutions campaigning over equality and diversity issues, for using their heritage and identity to bolster their own arguments about a post-racial Britain where a victim mindset, or even cultural deficit, hold ethnic minorities back, not institutional racism or structural barriers.

During this critique, the term 'house Negro' has been used on social media by individuals who find the stance taken by these politicians perverse and elitist. But while the term could unquestionably give offence, Leeds Beckett University has gone further, to imply - without spelling it out - that the use of the phrase is racist. What lies at the heart of this recent controversy is the distinction between words that are racist and words that could cause offence, with those now berating the Race Trust equating the giving of offence with racism.

In the BBC Big Questions debate with Kehinde Andrews (and in comments made to the , Robinson described the hurt he feels when people call him out for being a house Negro (or, even more pejoratively, bounty bar or coconut). After the show, the Race Trust (a charity founded by Khanom) tweeted him, asking if it wasn't a cause of shame for him that some people saw him as a house Negro. And this set off a train of events that led to the removal of Aysha Khanom from her advisory role at the Centre for Race, Education and Decoloniality (CRED) at Leeds Beckett University, despite the fact she personally did not send the tweet, though she did make a comment about Robinson in a private conversation, which he interpreted as aggressive, though claiming that he took it on the chin. The offending tweet had been sent by an employee of the Race Trust, which put out a statement admitting it was ill-informed and that they had taken 'appropriate action' against the person who sent it.
More twists and turns
From here the story takes on a new number of twists and turns. These are well documented by Byline Times journalists Sian Norris and Nafeez Ahmed, as well as Troll Zoo, a social media account that specialises in monitoring the creation of false accounts on social media. Read together, these two accounts give some idea of the duplicities involved in the making of a case against Aysha Khanom. In particular, the journalists have revealed how:

* various private communications from Khanom were shared without her consent and placed in the public domain by Point News, the news outlet of the far-right Turning Point UK (whose founder is a supporter of the white nationalist QAnon conspiracy theory and whose mother organisation in the US is allegedly rife with racism). Leave EU's news website Foxhole, and VoteWatch (whose editor was formerly editor-in-chief of the alt-right platform Politicalite, previously suspended from Twitter for violating hate speech rules) also placed the material in the public domain, despite the fact that private direct messages are generally considered off-the-record and printing them without consent without a good public interest justification is considered a breach of privacy;

* a fake account with an assumed name and stolen photograph was created by a Twitter troll, who sought to compromise Khanom by drawing her into a conversation about Robinson while pretending to want to hire her. Turning Point UK and VoteWatch subsequently published edited and cropped screenshots of these messages, withholding the name used in the false account.

*Right-wing newspapers such as the Daily Mail, the Times and the Telegraph then reported on the affair in sensationalist terms, based only on the facts given by Turning Point UK and Vote-Watch, without reporting on the underhand use of a troll.
The aftermath - learning the lessons
So this was the background to Leeds Beckett University's decision to sever links with Aysha Khanom, seemingly unaware that Calvin Robinson had told both the Daily Mail and the that as a supporter of free speech and a critic of 'cancel culture' he did not want the originator of the tweet sacked. He added though, that he was glad that 'this person had been exposed for what they are' - though not elaborating on what precisely he felt they were, or what had been exposed. However, in an interview with Sky News Australia, he gave the impression - wittingly or unwittingly - that the offending tweet from the Race Trust had used the N-word about him, which had the effect of bolstering his argument that he was the victim of 'anti-racists' 'hurling racist abuse at people'.

All organisations working for racial justice can draw lessons from the experience of the Race Trust, particularly about the need for greater awareness about dangers posed by far-right trolls, and the need to ensure social media activities do not draw organisations into unnecessary controversies that give far-right news outlets and a UKIP-style party the oxygen of publicity.

However, the issues raised by this campaign and the misleading press reportage go beyond the far Right - as explained in interventions from Professor Kehinde Andrews and Professor Gus John, the latter now representing Aysha Khanom in her bid to get a fair hearing from Leeds Beckett University.

It was Professor Gus John who alerted IRR News to the controversy, shocked to learn that the far Right and right-wing press had taken it upon themselves to define the use of 'Negro' and the term 'house Negro' as a racial slur - and that a university with a Centre for Race, Education and Decoloniality no less, which has at its disposal various archives, could end up legitimating them. 'Little did they know', he adds ironically, 'that by their actions they have made themselves the subject of a fantastic case study in "race and decoloniality".'

Amongst other learning points!
Which N word?
'There are some deeply worrying aspects of the Calvin Robinson/Aysha Khanom/Race Trust Twitter saga', Gus John told us, 'not least the designation of the term Negro as "racist". In this whole affair, no one has said why the term "Negro" is racist, who determined it was racist, when they did so, and when in common English usage - in the UK - "Negro" has ever been used as a racial slur'.

John is correct to point out that the debacle has centred around the notion that Negro and the 'N word' are interchangeable, when they have different roots and meanings historically. Right-wing newspapers like the Daily Mail went so far as to write 'n*gro' as though the word was too vile for their high-minded racially-aware readers to countenance over breakfast. On the other hand, in other modern contexts such as international football, ' negrito' has been used as a racial taunt, to wind players up in much the same way as the 'N word' was used in the past. The well-known incident involving the Uruguayan player Luís Suarez and the French (Senegalese) player Patrice Evra, demonstrated that.

But, as the IRR argued in its evidence to the Chakrabarti inquiry into antisemitism, it is vital that we do not shift the meaning of 'racism' from the objective to the subjective, to personalise it, allowing it to move from something tangible and subject to prosecution, to anything that gives hurt, offence or discomfort. Or as Gus John simply puts it, 'the fact that a statement or language used might be pejorative does not make it racist'.

It is of course true that the term Negro is old fashioned and, especially after Malcom X criticised it in the 1960s and introduced the notion of first Black and then Afro-American, it has fallen out of use in the US. In the UK the use of the term Negro gave way in the 1960s to Coloured and later to Black and later to BAME and later to 'people of colour'. Still, historically, the word Negro was never a racial slur, it was just a word meaning black. It was first used by the Spanish and Portuguese to describe anyone of Black African heritage. And this became the accepted and acceptable term in the late nineteenth century: the American Negro Academy was established in the US in 1897, Marcus Garvey used the word in his famous Universal Negro Improvement Society, Du Bois used the term in his book titles, the Journal of Negro Education was established at Howard in 1932 and the journal still uses that title. The term Negro also continues to be used to describe music - ie, Negro Spirituals ( Are we going to see Radio 3 censor the term every time they play Paul Robeson, for fear that Daily Mail readers will faint?) It was a term still used in the US by Martin Luther King in his 1963 'I have a dream' speech. ( Are we to see this great speech bowdlerised, to be rendered ineffective, by using asterisks every time King uses the word Negro?)
From Negro to house Negro
Those on the far Right seem to think they are experts on the etymological roots and modern application of the term 'house Negro'. It is a 'racist smear to describe a black person either sympathetic to, or envious of white people', according to VoteWatch editor Jay Beecher. And for Robinson, who believes that 'anti-racist' equals 'racist' and that the constant focus on race is divisive, it is a form of race-baiting and those who use it must be exposed 'for the racists they are'.

But as both Gus John and Kehinde Andrews - both professors and both long-serving educationalists - point out, the use of the term 'house Negro' is not a racial slur, although when used as part of an understanding of the history of black enslavement, it can certainly make people feel uncomfortable. In fact the term house Negro, which originated as a means of differentiating between those who worked in the house from those who worked on the plantation - 'field Negro' - has more of a class connotation than anything else. The differentiation between house and field denoted a class differentiation (during slavery) and could also imply a closer relationship to white society. In a speech about the difference between the house and field Negro, Malcolm X argued that because the house Negro was in a slightly privileged position, not subject to the backbreaking work in the field, he was not best placed to understand the severity of the system. In his open letter to Leeds Beckett University, Kehinde Andrews pointed out that 'Essentially, it is a recognition of class distinctions in Black communities, that there are those who are slightly better off and therefore might not understand the problem of racism.' Yes, it is a term that can make people uncomfortable, but that is the point as it encourages an approach that ensures 'we are accountable to the broad range of Black experience, and not just our own'.

Of course, this is also what lies at the heart of the matter - for collectivism and accountability are anathema to Calvin Robinson's cultural conservativism. In the final analysis, Leeds Beckett University, in terminating its relationship with Aysha Khanom and issuing a statement that 'strongly condemns the use of racist language', has come down firmly on the side of those far-right and right-wing forces that, for whatever reason, conflate racism with the giving of offence and delight in showing up anti-racists as the 'race offenders', particularly if they are people of colour.

We contacted Leeds Beckett University, whose spokesperson said 'The Twitter discussion referenced does not accurately reflect the sequence of events; the timing of our decisions; or the reasons, that we provided to Ms Khanom, for our actions. We published our response to Professor Kehinde Andrew's open letter on the university's website. '

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Leeds Beckett University has set a dangerous precedent by publicly severing its links with Aysha Khanom, founder of the Race Trust, following a Twitter controversy. At the centre of the controversy that led to the severing of all ties with its adviser Khanom by Leeds Beckett University, which hosts the Centre for Race, Education andRead More...