[Oboogie]

Rupa Huq, what a racist arsehole. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... g-comments

[Abernathy]

Rupa is guilty of nothing other than bad timing and political naievety. She certainly isn’t a “racist arsehole”.

If you consider what she actually said (and I understand she has now apologised to Kwarteng), she described him as “superficially black”, which is actually quite difficult to disagree with, in my view. Similar has been said of Kwarteng in the thread that bears his name on this very website. Kwarteng is indisputably a black man, but he isn’t a typical black guy, if such a creature exists. Most black guys did not attend expensive public schools, did not go to Oxford University, and do not sound like Kwarteng does.

Is the objection to the description of him as “black”(indisputable), or as “superficially”? (again, IMO, indisputable).

[Oboogie]

So because he doesn't conform to her stereotype of what a black man is he's "superficial".
He's black, therefore he should be poor and uneducated because that's what she thinks all REAL black people are like ?
The bloke's a vile cunt but to suggest he should know his place is blatant racism.

[Abernathy]

You’re reading a hell of a lot into one adverb, there. I don’t think any of that was meant by Huq.

[Oboogie]

You’re reading a hell of a lot into one adverb, there. I don’t think any of that was meant by Huq.

Most people did not attend expensive public schools, did not go to Oxford University, and do not sound like Kwarteng does. Why does Kwarteng's blackness mean that he needs to be singled out? Yes, he's from a privileged background, why bring race into it?

[davidjay]

On the best day for Labour since 2010 she gave the Tories, and their media, a stick to beat us with. She knows they love to roll out the "real racists" line so how in God's name did she think this was a good idea?

[Abernathy]

Why bring race into it? Because Kwarteng is a black guy. Do go back and have a read of the thread on him, in particular Armsteen’s remarks about him.

The Tories like to bang on about their racially diverse front bench, but Kwarteng, Braverman, Patel, Cleverly are all , somewhat counter-intuitively, vile Tories.

As I say, I think Huq’s biggest sin is a failure of her political radar on the day of the leader’s conference address, rather than racism.

[The Weeping Angel]

[Malcolm Armsteen]

Why bring race into it? Because Kwarteng is a black guy. Do go back and have a read of the thread on him, in particular Armsteen’s remarks about him.

The Tories like to bang on about their racially diverse front bench, but Kwarteng, Braverman, Patel, Cleverly are all , somewhat counter-intuitively, vile Tories.

As I say, I think Huq’s biggest sin is a failure of her political radar on the day of the leader’s conference address, rather than racism.

Spot on.

[Oboogie]

I don't see what's "counter-intuitive" about Tories being vile, in my experience it's commonplace.
Why anyone would expect BAME Tories to be any different beats me, if they weren't vile, they probably wouldn't be Tories.

[Tubby Isaacs]

What the heck was that? Some sort of academic thought experiment about blackness being a social construct or something?

Hard to think of a bigger long term gift that she could have served up.

[mattomac]

The fact it’s not a gift tells you exactly where we are at.

Labour did the right thing to move swiftly and quickly. The Party cannot dilly dally over idiocy like this, that is best left to the past incumbents.

[Oboogie]

Margaret Hodge very clearly condemning it as racism on Newsnight and (after the clip cuts off) Andrew Fisher agreed - rare for those two to see eye to eye on anything.

[Andy McDandy]

So, onto the crucial question - on Friday will Littlecock refer to her as RuPaul Huq, or Rupert Bear Hug?

Bonus points if he pads out the article with references to her sister (nice Konnie Huq) or brother in law Charlie Brooker ("foul mouthed former Guardian columnist..." is my bet).

[Abernathy]

I don't see what's "counter-intuitive" about Tories being vile, in my experience it's commonplace.
Why anyone would expect BAME Tories to be any different beats me, if they weren't vile, they probably wouldn't be Tories.

The counter-intuitivity is not in relation to Tories, but in relation to black people in general. In my experience, and I do have some personal experience to draw on, having been married to a black woman for 26 years, with an array of black in-laws and more than a few long term black friends and acquaintances, generally speaking, they are all very decent people, whom it would be jarring to discover were Tories of the stripe of Kwarteng or Cleverly. This is where, in my view, and, by the way, also that of my wife, Huq’s observation of Kwarteng as “superficially black” is actually accurate, and not particularly racist. I disagree with Margaret Hodge that Huq’s remarks were racist, and can only repeat that in my view, Huq is guilty merely of political naivete and quite exceptionally bad timing.

[Andy McDandy]

While the idea of a single black (or Desi, or LGBTQ+, or disabled) "community" is not accurate, one would expect a member of a demographic section that has generally got the shitty end of the stick in this country to have some empathy for others in that position*. Not to see all black people as victims, or in need of help, but to acknowledge that for the most part you're starting from a different place.

There's a reason black kids are taught how to deal with the police in a way most white kids aren't. For Kwarteng or Cleverly, who have come from very privileged backgrounds, to adopt an attitude of "I had no problems so anyone else should just pull their socks up" shows a lack of understanding of the advantages they have had. Or as the Americans and James O'Brien are fond of saying, born on 3rd base but think they hit a home run.

*I'm a man, assigned male at birth. I don't claim any sort of brotherhood with the 49% of the world's population who consider themselves men, but I still wince when I see another guy take a football to the nads.

[MisterMuncher]

It's reminiscent of an old George Carlin bit about liberal types discussing their gay friends with the qualifiers "openly" and "happens to be", and how recovered from that context, they can be useful as descriptors:

For example, Colin Powell "happens to be" black. Muhammed Ali was "openly" black.

It's a clumsy way to say that Kwarteng's experiences and outcomes aren't entirely typical or representative of those experienced by a majority of black people. I can understand why such remarks need to be acted on by the leadership as they sound fucking horrendous, bit the underlying sentiment is probably not that wrong. And certainly understandable.

[davidjay]

As Jerry said in the first episode of The Good Life about his job being a joke, "Yes it is. But not out loud." Nick Ferrari was on full throttle this morning about it when otherwise he would have been trying to find fault with Starmer.

[Oboogie]

"Sir Keir Starmer has branded Rupa Huq's comments about Kwasi Kwarteng being "superficially" black as clearly "racist".

The Labour leader welcomed the party taking "very swift action" in suspending Ms Huq's membership in the wake of her remarks at a fringe event at the Labour Party conference in Liverpool.

Ms Huq, the MP for Ealing Central and Acton in west London, offered a "sincere and heartfelt" apology to Mr Kwarteng over her "ill-judged" comments, after she was criticised by senior Labour figures.

"I have today contacted Kwasi Kwarteng to offer my sincere and heartfelt apologies for the comments I made. My comments were ill-judged, and I wholeheartedly apologise to anyone affected," she said on Tuesday.

Ms Huq was nevertheless administratively suspended from the party and lost the whip.

'What she said, in my view, was racist'
Commenting on the incident, Sir Keir told LBC Radio: "What she said, in my view, was racist, it was wrong and she's been suspended from the whip in the party and that was done very, very quickly.

"I think that tells you how strongly I feel about those comments."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/0 ... -sir-keir/

also

[Crabcakes]

The daft thing is, she left the party with no choice. Starmer wants to - and has - put a big gap between himself and the Tories on behaviour and ethics. They’d have let this slide. Labour - whether Huq was genuinely racist, which I don’t think is the case because her character and past actions don’t suggest a pattern of it, or simply used very clumsy language and engaged her mouth before her brain - cannot, or risk losing the momentum (not that one) they’ve worked so hard to get.

I think she may have to resign. Or be very strongly asked to consider her position.