Stuart Waiton: Punters paying the penalty for racism storm

Published on Saturday 11 February 2012 02:36

AS THE search begins for Fabio Capello’s replacement as England manager, there is yet another beautifully ironic twist to the anti-racist hysteria surrounding the John Terry case. In one of the leading “liberal” UK daily newspapers, the front page comment on Capello begins by explaining in a dismissive tone that, “Fabio Capello never bothered to learn much English, or much about England”.

More than this, the English Football Association appears to be hamstrung in their future appointment of the England manager. We need a little Englander, it seems, to manage the national team, not another b****** foreigner. Indeed, for the new right-thinking little Englander, anti-racism has at times become a new, bizarre form of national pride, used to denounce Spanish or East European football fans. “They’re backward those foreigners, don’t you know. Not like us civilised anti-racist English”.

So comfortably does being narrowly patriotic sit with being passionately anti-racist today, it is difficult to know what anti-racism actually means any more. Not that long ago, getting involved in anti-racist activities for me meant campaigning against people being deported, defending Asian families from racist attacks in the East End of London, or opposing nationalism and immigration laws that targeted black people (as they still generally do).

Today, it seems to be little more than a new form of etiquette for the middle classes who express their “offended-ness” when the hoi polloi call each other nasty names.

Following the recent trial of the killers of Stephen Lawrence, a human rights campaigner observed with pride that racism had become the new secular sin, and indeed it has. It is not possible to mix in the right circles today without being a card-carrying official anti-racist.

Unfortunately, once something becomes a sin, an evil, rather than a political idea and argument, those who oppose this evil run the risk of acting like moralising priests and becoming irrational and reactionary. Ironically (again), while official anti-racism is upheld most fervently by those who call themselves “tolerant”, these very same people are the most intolerant people in Britain today. Indeed, as I sit writing this, a colleague has just warned me to “be careful” about what I say: Next to being called a paedophile, being labelled a “racist” is this next best thing to destroy your reputation.

Following discussions about John Terry on television and on the radio, there has been a clear awkwardness about expressing opinions that drift from the official anti-racist line of being “offended”. On TalkSPORT, the usually in-your-face presenter Adrian Durham noted he was aware that one slip of the tongue on the issue of race and he would be washing dishes for the rest of his life – a situation he appeared to think was entirely reasonable.

Unfortunately for Match of the Day’s Alan Hansen, when discussing this race issue, he used the term “coloured”, leading to an embarrassed silence, as the other pundits wondered whether he too had crossed the linguistic correctness line.

As the witch-hunt steamed along, the question of Terry’s guilt or innocence was tossed aside with barely a second thought (something that even the Prime Minister has had his say on), and so the captaincy was lost, Capello’s authority undermined and England are left without a manager (who has been paid around £6 million a year for the past four years) a few months before the start of arguably the second most important football competition in the world.

However, if we stand back from the moralising, apolitical, official anti-racism today, the John Terry farce looks rather different. I asked one of the admin workers at my university what they thought about John Terry being taken to court for calling Anton Ferdinand a racist name. “It’s a joke” she replied. “Grown men telling tales on one another?”

But what is obvious to some, is unfortunately a bizarre pantomime of confused offence for others. Surely you don’t have to be a card-carrying British National Party member to think there is something wrong with the whole Terry-Ferdinand thing? Players in the heat of a game often slag each other off. This doesn’t mean it is right, but does it make it criminal? Unfortunately the institutionally sanctioned response to being called names today is not to give your opponent a piece of your mind, but to be offended and to go to the authorities. Within the media, the correct response is to feel offended for the offended.

Anyone who does not show they are also offended is seen as being offensive. And, as the new Offensive Behaviour at Football Act in Scotland illustrates, this runaway train of offence-taking is set to increase ever more north of the Border as well.

There’s an Australian comic who takes the p*** out of people who claim to be offended. “So what,” he says, “so you’ve been offended. Nothing happens. You don’t wake up the next morning with leprosy”.

Many would say this approach trivialises racism. But what really trivialises anti-racism, indeed trivialises politics and infantilises football players, is when grown men calling each other names on a football pitch becomes a national debate and results in bans, court cases, sackings and resignations.

The final tragedy of all this is that relations between ordinary punters and black and Asian people in this country may become more distant, awkward and confused because of the nonsense of “offence” which turns even the most anti-racist individual into an anxious, tongue-twisted twerp, unable to have a conversation with a colleague without feeling the need to receive linguistic correctness training, just in case.

• Stuart Waiton is a lecturer in sociology at Abertay University and founder of public forum Take a Liberty Scotland

Related Articles

• Terry charged over racism claims

  John Terry says he is determined to clear his name of the racism charge that has been levelled against him.

  0 Comments

Comments

There are 4 comments to this article

Order by:

• Newest first
• |
• Oldest first

Page 1 of 1

• 1
• Show all

4

DanielGenseric

Sunday, February 12, 2012 at 06:13 PM

Everybody says there is this RACE problem. Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries. The Netherlands and Belgium are just as crowded as Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them. Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites. What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries? How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem? And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this? But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews. They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white. Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.

• Report Unsuitable

3

Tartancult

Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 07:24 PM

Well written steptoe, just one question - did you use more than one crayon?

• Report Unsuitable

2

tartantt

Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 11:04 AM

Innocent until PROVEN guilty!! And guilty of what? Calling someone names; throwing an insult at someone. This is football. It has become too easy to bandy accusations about, causing SEVERE distress to ordinary folk. Those accusers have nothing to lose at present, & should be brought to book for being guilty of childishness.

• Report Unsuitable

1

steptoe

Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 08:33 AM

Yep, the whole thing is a farce,or more sinisterly like an excerpt from "The trail" by Kaffka".The left are so hypocritical but have the "Chutzpa"toresort to racial stereotypingwhenever possible.I remember a full front page picture of an England captain complete with Tommy helmet and bayonet whem playing Germany.That paper proclaims itself "Anti-racist"(Germans excluded). A team mate of Terrys made a text to a friend saying "I hate England and all it's people "if for onstance the S.N.P.had a member saying that he would have been hounded out of office. The difference was that the aforsaid Terry's teammate was Black ,this individual as if to prove his contempt for whole judicial system,one day set off to his place of training with tracksuit ,trainers and i kid you not a high velocity air weapon . He brought the aforsaid weapon from his bag pointed at an aforsaid English person pulled the trigger leaving that person needing hospital treatment . Inspector Cluasau of the Met failed to link the two incedents money probably changed hands and it's all forgotten.

• Report Unsuitable

Order by:

• Newest first
• |
• Oldest first

Page 1 of 1

• 1
• Show all

Logged in as:

Comment here. Start typing your comment here:

Post comment

Please adhere to our Community guidelines

Your view

Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.