Of course Rupa Huq was wrong, but why is it the left that always gets it in the neck for racism?
JVL Introduction
This thoughtful contribution by Nels Abbey, a British-Nigerian writer and media executive based in London, was published in today’s Guardian.
We preface it with this JVL statement on the Rupa Huq affair, posted earlier on JVL’s Facebook page as an introduction to a story reporting Huq’s suspension:
“Rupa Huq’s remarks about Kwasi Kwarteng were wrong and she was right to apologise; but her suspension by the Labour Party is a hypocritical overreaction.
“It is painful that the Party is trying to establish its credentials on anti-Black racism by sanctioning a woman of colour when it continues to scrupulously ignore the dreadful behaviour by Party staff towards Black MPs as disclosed in the leaked report on the activities of the GLU and confirmed by the Forde Report. This failure includes not protecting Black MPs like Diane Abbott and colluding in the harassment of Muslim MPs like Apsana Begum. The revelations in the three part Al Jazeera documentary highlight the systematic racist treatment of Black and Muslim members and employees of the Party by those running our Party (all three episodes can be accessed here Al Jazeera – The Labour Files).
“Kwarteng’s politics are appalling and dangerous and demand the most determined opposition, but his policies must be countered by political argument and not by offensive references to his identity. As JVL, we must also point out the hypocrisy of those currently castigating Huq who have never once questioned the systematic insulting of our members as ‘not real Jews’ or ‘asaJew’s and indeed contain among their number some of those who have indulged in such tawdry behaviour.”
This article was originally published by the Guardian on Thu 29 Sep 2022. Read the original here.
Of course Rupa Huq was wrong, but why is it the left that always gets it in the neck for racism?
In this climate, anti-racists are always one mistake away from disgrace, while rightwingers who cause division get away scot-free
Loading article text…
This contains some additional details about the episode:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-63052522
I couldn’t disagree more with this article and I regret that JVL has dignified it by reposting it here. Obviously there is a long tradition among Black communities and wider people-of-colour, of critiquing those who collaborate with oppressors and exploiters or ideologically fortify their establishment position.
Malcolm X’s metaphors for this, was the ‘house slave’ or ‘house Negro’ – someone who enjoys similar food to the slave master by supporting and personally catering to him, while ‘field hands’ suffer the master’s lash.
Professor Cornel West similarly pointed that George Bush was using Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice to ‘Blackwash’ his racist foreign policy. The Professor has made a similar critique of Barak Obama being the white establishment’s ‘Black’ President.
At its worse we have a situation where people like David Lammy and Obama have for career advancement reasons, supported policies that were responsible for the slaughter and enslavement of their own ancestors. Are we to be prevented from mentioning this? After Obama unleashed Hillary Clinton on Libya the destruction gave rise of modern slave markets in the country– some achievement for a ‘Black’ US President?
Obviously the attacks on Rupa Huq are another way of telling disadvantaged groups not to speak back to power, or critique establishment proxies. And in this case establishment narratives are trying to ideologically spin the tradition of Black radicalism, as if it were instead merely mocking Black people for simply having white mainstream mannerisms. This should be resisted.
How often and in how many guises have we been told that the weak talking back to the powerful is somehow abuse?
‘“Superficial blackness” has never been the problem with Kwarteng: politically convenient opposition to anti-racist causes has been.’
That’s what Rupa Huq meant but she put it clumsily. The idea she was making a racist comment is ludicrous. There’s a tradition of criticism of black people who turn their backs on those below – see Malcolm X.
I don’t get the criticisms of Nels Abby’s article by “Dave” and Gavin Lewis. Both of them are repeating pretty much what Nels – and Malcolm X, Cornell West etc. are also saying: attack the man for their politics not their colour. Rupa Huq reproduced a trope about how black people should sound. It is as much an attack on them as it is on Kwarteng. This was a racist statement and a mistake on her part, but it does not mean that she is a racist (there is a big difference) and suspension is not warranted.
Nels Abbey is black. Rupa Huq is black. I don’t know if ‘dave’ or Gavin Lewis are. I am not black. I am white, and Jewish. I hesitate to dive in form this position, but while I get where Dave and Gavin are coming from, I largely agree with Nels’ piece. His third paragraph replicates what I thought and said when I heard Huq’s remarks. His last paragraphs seem spot on. I would defend Huq from some of the attacks, but it sounded more than ‘clumsy.’ I don’t know if it was meant to be humour as Nels suggest; more like a polite way of calling Kwarteng a coconut. But less elegant, with its suggestion that to be authentically black can only be to have a different experience from Kwarteng. Huq must have thought that. I think its about class, experience and hierarchies.
I wouldn’t call even the most right wing of the Jewish establishment ‘superficially Jewish’ (unless they really were not Jews, perhaps). It’s not a helpful insult. I might call them bigoted, uncaring, nationalist or whatever was relevant and fair comment. They might insult me but that’s another matter.
I think a lot of the points made by Nels Abbey are reasonable but I think Gavin Lewis’ critique also holds water.
A lot of us know that the diversity game is just that – a game. I used to be CEO of a company that was obliged to fill out endless pages of nonsense to submit to the Arts Council to show that we we “diverse.” Our company was driven by socialist, anti-racist principles and was way ahead of other Arts Council clients in terms of the multi-racial profiles of our staff, yet we were forced to spend hours ticking boxes and submitting forms to drones who wouldn’t be seen dead on a May Day March, pro-Palestinian or anti-racist demo.
I spent further exasperating hours on one occasion filling out a work permit application for a Chinese citizen I wanted to employ. “Do you think this person will overstay their work permit?” might have been a reasonable question but instead I was asked in multiple ways: “Do you think this person has ever considered committing an act of genocide?”
My application was fortunately successful and the employee in question later confided in me that Chinese people have a word for those who have internalised imperialist-driven racists ideas: “bananas” – yellow on the outside but white on the inside. Later I found that people from India and Pakistan sometimes use the term “coconuts” in the same way.
When I was younger, things seemed more straightforward. A black person who acted against the interests of other black people was simply “an uncle Tom.” Working class people who betrayed their class were “scabs.” These are the realities in places like the dockyard where I started work and where my political consciousness started to develop. In this context, whilst I can see that Rupa Huq’s remarks may have been “clumsy,” I cannot see that they were in any way as egregious as the continued presence of people like Luke Akehurst in the Labour Party.
Rupa did NOT deserve these attacks. To not raise your voice against racism when you are a senior black politician is disgraceful and needs calling out. We have got to stop throwing our Asian, Black and Jewish members under a bus whenever the establishment start whining. Be strong comrade Rupa.
Just to add – my starting point is, how likely is that Rupa Huq is racist? How likely is it that Jewish socialists are antisemitic? Or Jeremy Corbyn? Once you move on from that with the obvious answer you can set comments in context.
In this case I’ll also say that her comment probably expresses disappointment more than anything. We know though that being black or brown doesn’t prevent people from punching down on the poor and vulnerable (see also Priti Patel…) and of course it is racist to say that a black person or Jew cannot be racist as that would be othering a people for what they are not.
But again the starting point is: Huq is an anti-racist (and not even a radical leftie) so her comment should be interpreted in that context and not as an isolated trope than condemns her out of hand.
I would hope a white contributor would be able and feel able, to make the same points that I posted here.
Point of information given that Paul Seligman has enquired about my identity – I am the author of ‘Jewface and other David Baddiel racisms’ – republished by JVL, see end link. And this is my bio below
“Gavin Lewis is a freelance Black British mixed-race writer and academic. He has published in Australia, the United Kingdom, Canada and the United States on film, media, politics, cultural theory, race, and representation. He has taught critical theory and film and cultural studies at a number of British universities. He is a member of the British trade union Bectu.”
https://jewishvoiceforliberation.org.uk/article/jewface-and-other-david-baddiel-racisms/
This is a tiny point in a serious debate, but as a lefty in every respect, I don’t like the use of the term ‘cack handed’ (as in Nels 2nd para), it is a term with an obvious root, sparing the blushes, used to discredit left-handed people, and then extended as here to describe clumsiness and wrongness.
There a lot of rounded thoughtful posts here exploring the theme of ethnic betrayal and strategies in reaction to it.
Bringing these issues slightly closer to home for this site, is it possible to ask what are the equivalent attitudes are of anti-racist leftwing British Jews who have been smeared and attacked by the Board of Deputies and other parts of the Israel lobby? Careers and basic democratic participation has been harmed.
How do British Jews refer to those who have a greater allegiance to settler colonialism, than to other UK Jews?
“Of course Rupa Huq was wrong,” writes Nels Abbey, in the Guardian, and then doubles down on his false accusation with “The idea that Kwarteng is superficially black is not true.”
With respect, “Nonsense” I say.
I’ve always assumed that being superficially black was universally true of all black people – it stems from an assumption that all racial characteristics, e.g. skin colour, hair texture, cheek-bone shape and so on were never more that skin-deep and thus all such characteristics were indeed only superficial, all of them being no more than mere accidents of parentage. Therefore I see Ms Huq as having done no more than utter a truth, to wit that the racial differences that the eye detects i.e. skin colour, hair texture, cheek-bone shape and so on as listed above – all of them being attributes of our person which we acquire in the womb – are superficial.
Clearly however Mr Abbey, and those who pillory Ms Huq, are wishing to address an issue which is not superficial, an issue which in their eyes is of consequence. Thus it would be helpful I think if Mr Abbey (or someone) gave us a definition of “black” or “blackness” that would distinguish what they see from the superficial accident of birth that I see, and would perhaps indicate how their “black” or “blackness” (or “white” or “whiteness”) is acquired – if not in the womb.
Gavin – we call them right wing Jews. We may decry the fact that they have abandoned that part of Jewish history when Jews, experiencing what we would all recognise as antisemitism, and generally being poor and oppressed, located ourselves, mostly, on the side of the poor and the oppressed. We may also point out various aspects of Judaism which fit our own politics, but we would also know that Judaism, like other religions, is pick and mix. And we wouldn’t deny any Jews’ Jewishness because we didn’t agree with them. However, this is not to deny the deep sense of betrayal we may often feel – certainly I get desperately sad when I recall the old Jewish joke, three Jews four opinions, and compare it with the denial of our Jewish identity and legitimacy by the Jewish establishment who seem to think the ‘correct line’ should be – three hundred thousand British Jews, one opinion. The thing is – Jews have no less right to be obnoxious, class traitors, racists, murderers, capitalists etc etc than anyone else!
I reckon what Rupa Huq did was stupid, and I am unsurprised that the Labour bureaucracy leapt on her, even if their leap was utterly opportunist and outrageous when compared to the way they failed to protect Diane Abbott, for example. I also think it was lazy thinking on Huq’s part, not what I would expect from a former sociology lecturer! But as well as making mistakes, people on the left must be allowed to feel let down. When, during the first Intifada, a time when IDF aggression was not routinely captured and publicised by photographers or citizen journalists, I recall my (anti Zionist) mother reacting to a rare and horrific piece of film shown on the BBC news – a bunch of Israeli soldiers caught on camera viciously beating a Palestinian with their rifles. She cried out: “how can we behave like that, after everything that has happened to us?” She still saw those young Israelis as Jews, and she felt they had betrayed their own history, even as she also knew – rationally – that they should simply be held to account on the same basis as any other loutish members of an army of occupation.
Gavin Lewis, this one calls them zionists – and appreciates your thoughts on this subject.
Thanks to Naomi and Charlotte for your sentiments and references on this topic.
The problem that may need to be confronted here is that institutional power is ideologically changing the framing around language, terms, usages and even meanings.
Take’ Zionist’ – not all that long ago if you turned up on a current affairs show claiming that religion justified colonial conquest, you’d be treated like a member of the flat earth society. Since at least the 2014 post-Gaza bombing pro-Israel moral panic, Zionism is media treated as respectable. All reference to it being a 19th C white colonial ideology is censored, along with reference UN resolution 3379 describing it as racism.
This is a cultural shift in comparison to earlier years. In the 1960s spy drama ‘Funeral in Berlin’ a woman reveals herself to Michael Caine’s character – Harry Palmer – as an Israeli spy. He says “So, you turn out to be a dedicated Zionist – a fanatic!”
Similarly the 60s spy tv series ‘Callan’ in the first episode – ‘The Good Ones are all dead’- the central character Callan (Edward Woodward) is charged with investigating whether a Mediterranean businessman is actually a former German officer – with a view to handing over to Mossad. In the end he lets the suspect commit suicide because no one deserves what Mossad would do to them.
(I’ve used the examples in a longer article about the moral panic a while back – I’ll post link below)
Another example is the word ‘Left’. Most people on this site will pride themselves on being ‘Leftists’
‘The Left’s Popular Front’ was the first to confront fascism. The Left is responsible for NHS and so much more. But now the term is media used as a pejorative. When the Observer’s Sonia Sondha appeared on the BBC and was asked about the 1.5mil people who’d petitioned for Blair’s Knighthood to be rescinded, she said contemptuously “But that’s just the Left” – its one example of many.
We’ve also seen in the Rupa Huq case that the word ‘racism’ is subverted and misapplied. We already had words like ‘bias’, ‘prejudice’ etc. The term ‘racism’ was invented to describe those who when they experience bigotry, it is backed by the structural nature of society, its heirarchies, institutional and financial sites of power. Post-slavery, Post-colonialism, Black groups are predominantly ghettoised in the lower reaches of western class systems.
Clearly as Dave points out on this thread Rupa Huq has not racially oppressed a multi-millionaire, former public school boy, someone who has not shown the slightest degree of racial or social solidarity with genuinely oppressed groups. As a woman-of-colour how could she be racist? What societal mechanisms are designed to support her in this endeavour?
Leaving aside the similar subversion of words like ‘ideology’ & ‘narrative’ and that perhaps victims are perhaps being more civilised with the likes of the BoD than they deserve
– the real question raised here, is that as left wing Jews, what sort of language and strategies can you develop, to combat the misrepresentation of your arguments? When you come up with an answer don’t keep it to yourselves.
All the best, Gavin
See – Re-Marketing ‘Racist-Zionism’ and Manufacturing Double White Privilege-Plus
https://www.palestinechronicle.com/re-marketing-racist-zionism-and-manufacturing-double-white-privilege-plus/