I wrote here last week about how UK hate crime law is de facto two-tier, since our state is chiefly interested in pursuing such laws in order to punish alleged racism by white people, while tending to ignore it when it comes from ethnic minorities. This reflects a far wider feature of two-tier Britain: by intent and in practice, if not by its letter, anti-discrimination and equalities legislation only protects minorities. Think, for instance, of the white male would-be RAF pilots now forced to hawk their services to the Chinese after hundreds were rejected from joining the hallowed ranks of The Few, not for lack of skill or pluck, but due to their being insufficiently diverse. The fact that so-called positive discrimination is illegal did not prevent it from happening to these “useless white male pilots”.
Another feature of national life that has become subject to discrimination protections is housing. Indeed, we are so anxious to avoid even the faintest whiff of racial favouritism in housing that since the Race Relations Act 1976, it has been illegal for local authorities and housing associations to favour locally born families when allocating housing. Under this law, not treating someone whose can trace their ancestry back to the Domesday book as equivalent to a newly arrived Lahore taxi-driver would constitute ‘indirect discrimination‘. This is a major factor behind the extraordinary statistic that 47.6% of social housing in London is occupied by a foreign-born head of household. The result is that when bleary-eyed overtaxed commuters from Zone 5 and beyond make their hour-plus daily pilgrimages to central London, they are travelling through a city which is far more ‘diverse’ than where they live, and which they are both priced out of and heavily subsidising.
To read the rest of this article, you need to donate at least £5/month or £50/year to the Daily Sceptic, then create an account on this website. The easiest way to create an account after you’ve made a donation is to click on the ‘Log In’ button on the main menu bar, click ‘Register’ underneath the sign-in box, then create an account, making sure you enter the same email address as the one you used when making a donation. Once you’re logged in, you can then read all our paywalled content, including this article. Being a donor will also entitle you to comment below the line, discuss articles with our contributors and editors in a members-only Discord forum and access the premium content in the Sceptic, our weekly podcast. A one-off donation of at least £5 will also entitle you to the same benefits for one month. You can donate here.
There are more details about how to create an account, and a number of things you can try if you’re already a donor – and have an account – but cannot access the above perks on our Premium page.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
The system of governance known as diversity requires this sort of tribalism to be maintained. How this operates has been explained very succinctly by Ben Cobley.
What certain commentators really mean by the ‘miracle’ is just this, the creation of a community of communities that can be governed by an imperial centre. To maintain its rule, that centre requires that these groups are fixed, not just in their identity (hence protected), but also in their relationship to other groups.
Thus certain ethnic groups are permanently defined as disadvantaged. Racialism is no longer a phenomenon that can be removed but one that is permanent (hence ‘institutional racism’). For if it were not permanent, the imperial centre would have no legitimacy for its continued rule.
Given that the police are so diligent in monitoring the internet and cyberspace, these examples of lawbreaking illustrated here must have come to their attention.
Note also the advert that specified ‘non-veg NOT allowed’. In other words, the applicants have to be vegetarians. Discrimination at the level of diet. Perhaps plod needs to investigate whether this condition is religious in nature. And thus religious discrimination. In their evident wisdom perhaps the legislators need to make vegetarianism and veganism protected characteristics.
If that’s advertised by Hindus, it’s obviously religious. But considering that it closely aligns with parts of the state religion of climate change, it’s extremely unlikely to be considered discrimination. After all, it’s just an “incentive” for people to behave in the proper climate-changy way.
Excellent article Laurie. Well done in exposing this. I’m going to write letters to everyone I can think of. MP. Home Office, BBC. Etc.
We are being invaded by people without weapons but who are weapons educated by our state and establishment. The civil war cannot come soon enough.
But they DO have weapons. Plenty of them. Remember the video recording of the Muslim police officer telling the Muslim Gang Armed With Machetes to stash them down at the local Mosque.
The fabled multicultural society… Where cultural minorities prefer an enclave with their own cultural kith and kin… Where approved racial discrimination is condoned… And disapproved hurty words posted online brings a sentence from the heirs to Judge Jeffries.
Cultural Theatre of the Absurd. Go figure, Sir Two-Tier.
Culture is by very definition MONO, as it pertains to a specific group of people.
Multiculti actually means – NO common culture. And a nation with no common culture is doomed, all the more so when this is the result of government edict.
There will be blood, of that I have no doubt.
Happily, rural Somerset is stell profoundly and happily monocultural.
Likewise down a country lane in Cheshire. Last bastions of sanity. Prospect of getting the car muddy is a helpful deterrent.
A multicultural culture?
And this is happening in the English-language ads – imagine what the non-English ones are like!
All the same, some of these ads seem to be for people letting a room in their own house. It seems wrong that the law should be involved in that situation. Presumably, if you didn’t specify you wanted a Gujurati (or whatever) in the advert, allowing anyone who applied to come and look at the room, but then let it to the one Gujurati who applied (perhaps on the basis that you ‘got on better with them’), that would be perfectly legal?
All good points. I am a bit conflicted on this. While the current situation is obviously unsatisfactory because of the rank double standards, I like the idea of free association, but equally see problems with it where that results in people being excluded from basic services because the market is not sufficiently diverse to cater for them.
As ever ToF, a thoughtful and fair comment, I think proportionality and fairmindedness, never the strong suit of the government machine, have been abandoned.
Thanks
So why should we maintain “proportionality and fairmindedness?” That is the cause of our problems.
Free association should be a choice. Where it is being abused it should be in both directions. I choose NOT to associate with muslims and that position hardens by the day.
We have to have consistency
Do we?
Absolutely not and have not had for a long time, and the double standards are getting worse
The solution is to repeal the Equality Act (2010).
I tend to agree
While I can see some potential problems in removing protection against discrimination, I think state attempts to micro regulate human interactions will eventually cause more harm than good
Protection against discrimination by letter-of-the-law is futile. Discrimination is going to happen and people who are, say, in need of an accomodation will have other problems then sueing prospective landlords, because that’s not going to help them in any way. This is really only good for making the class of the professionally offended money.
Absolutely, and thousands of other laws, too, as that brilliant two-minute video “The Great Repeal Act” says:
Brewgalowe on X: “The Great Repeal Act @RupertLowe10, @RobertJenrick, and @DrDStarkeyCBE explain how to restore Great Britain. https://t.co/3gWVq8VOB0” / X
I am quite happy to hunker down in my country village content to ignore the noisy cess pits that cities have become. Hopefully I will see out my days before the incomers replicate Asian village life in the shires.
Ditto.
And who owns your local shop and post office?
Closed down.
Endemic tribalism amongst our ethnic minorities, and an inevitable backlash from some in the native population, is why Prof David Betz, Professor of War in the Department of War Studies at King’s College London is predicting a Civil War.
It’s why the Establishment, particularly Two-Tier-Keir, come down so hard on any in the working class who dares object, even if it’s by writing something hurty on Facebook or Twitter.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOR8NhL09JQ
Precisely.
At least in Reading, there are also barber shops run by black people who outright refuse to serve white customers. I had this happening to me some years ago.
Sounds like you had a lucky escape. No use in tempting fate.
I was just planning to get a proper skinhead haircut and injuring people with a shaver is difficult if not impossible. But they wouldn’t even talk to me but just motioned me to leave immediately.
An advertisement for letting to a muslim couple or two muslim females
also pretty obviously implies NO GAYS!!!
Didn’t we fairly recently have a spat of MSM articles claiming that Muslims couldn’t be gayer about sexual diversity and that claims to the contrary were a far-right conspiracy theory?
Well done to Laurie Wastell for this fine piece of good old-fashioned investigative journalism!
If it is unfair to the bred-and-born native, who traces his ancestry back to the Domesday Book, to treat him no differently from the taxi-driver newly-arrived from Lahore, does that mean that, to be fair, we ought to take race (or, more politely, ‘ethnicity’) into account when handing out the rights and benefits of residence and citizenship, that our laws should not be ‘colour blind’?
My question is: how long is it going to take for people who understand these sort of issues to realise that we cannot fix this situation by somehow fixing government (with what: magic pixy dush delivered by flying unicorns perhaps).
That does not mean that government is failing to function as it was designed, but rather that government was designed to function in precisely the way we see it to be conducting itself today. It is happening by design, it is deliberate, it is intentional.
The solution is not to cut the head off the monster, but rather, because it will always grow another perhaps worse head, dig its every root and sinew out of the ground. Leave it to wither away in the light of the sun.
’The state’ was instigated by the predatory ruling class of its day eons ago. It is a self replicating, self sustaining, psychopathic system of exerting control over the populous, and yet entirely possible to perpetually influence the whole towards the true requirement of its role: as the device of the predatory ruling class of yesterday and today.
We will never be truly free and face ever deepening slavery to ‘the state’ and therefore, de facto, the beneficiaries of ‘the state’.
This is what I say, and keep on saying: belief in the legitimacy and the utility of ‘the state‘ is an indoctrinated cult (and I mean each word precisely).
Orwell was here!