Calling someone an Uncle Tom or a race traitor is acceptable if the object of your derision is someone on the right or someone who disagrees with left wing fetishization of Islam. Never has that been clearer than in the last year, where for some reason the appointment of not one but six BAME (to use a phrase coined by the woke) MPs to the Great Offices of State has provoked the outrage of the left wing and progressive commentariat.
It all started when back in July, Boris Johnson named Sajid Javid, Priti Patel, Rishi Sunak, Alok Sharma, James Cleverly and Suella Braverman to positions of high office within his cabinet. These appointments were mocked or derided by those who usually shout for more minority representation. Clive Lewis congratulated James Cleverly on ‘selling his soul,’ as if he were making a deal with the devil, when really he was accepting a well deserved promotion in government. Ash Sarkar, she of the ethnic division stoking and literal communism dismissed these appointments as nothing more than tokenism and had the audacity to criticise those appointed as Uncle Tomming it up by adopting ‘oppressive ideologies’ for power. What oppressive ideologies they were exactly adopting she couldn’t say, but she felt the need to put it out there.
As if that weren’t enough, the subtle snobbery and racism of Lewis and Sarkar was outdone by the blatant racial hatred of Kerry Anne Mendoza when she tweeted that any person of colour (how is that term different to term coloured person again?) who would join a far right government (far right my arse) was no longer a person of colour. Instead, they were a turncoat of colour. So, not only was she lying about the nature of Boris Johnson’s government, she, a white person was claiming that if you were joining his government you weren’t even a fucking coloured person anymore. How utterly ridiculous and nonsensical. But the most horrendous thing was that her tweet got 1.2 K likes on twitter and got thousands of comments which stated their approval of her comments. How fucking disgraceful, from a side that claims it is the tolerant one in the UK!
These initial outbursts sort of died down but they came springing back to life recently, when Priti Patel announced a new immigration bill that not only ended freedom of movement (cue the howls of rage from Little Remainers) it also imposed a salary cap on those who could come into the country. Whilst the bill was part of the Tories fulfilling a manifesto promise to reduce immigration, certain clauses such as the salary cap looked particularly ridiculous given that they would reduce the chances of certain workers such as nurses and others deemed as ‘key workers’ in this current crisis, from being able to enter the UK and prop up a faltering sector. This has rightly been seen as a slap in the face and deserves criticism, as does the health surcharge that immigrant workers are being forced to pay.
What I take umbrage with however is how some have been voicing their criticism of the bill. Instead of acting like adults, as they demand of others, these people have been making it personal. Take this tweet by Meera Syal, she of Goodness Gracious Me fame. In it she points out rightly that the bill is a slap in the face, but then she goes onto claim that Priti Patel ‘probably eats chapati with a knife and fork.’ This might seem harmless, but it harkens back to accusations made by Sarkar and others, that Priti Patel isn’t an actual Indian because how could an Indian ever be part of Boris’ government or tolerate such a bill.
Quite frankly, Syal should be ashamed of herself. Using such a comment to make a wider political point is unacceptable and is childish. By trying to claim that doing something one way or another defines whether you are Indian or not, Syal is effectively parrotting the language of the far right. After all, they are the ones who are obsessed with ethnicity and certain characteristics, by claiming eating a chapati with a knife and fork is somehow wrong or worthy of mocking, Syal is imitating them, with all the baggage that comes with.
She might try and deny it later on, but that is the truth. Nobody else can define whether an individual is or isn’t an Indian. Indeed, people like Syal usually tend to argue that there is no set definition for what makes up a British person, they usually argue that it is entirely up to the person themselves. So, how dare she now turn around and use this chapati bullshit to make a point about Patel.
You can dislike a person’s politics, it’s a free country after all, but don’t you dare try and claim that just because they hold different views to you that they aren’t a proper Brit, Indian, Pakistani, gay or what have you. That is simply reductionist and smacks of the kind of identantarianism we’ve all been told to reject.
One thing this has shown me, is that the progressives don’t give a shit about minorities, at least not if they hold views that are considered haram by the progressive crowd. If you’re an Indian and you are right wing, expect to be called an Uncle Tom and called a race traitor. The progressives have shown they have fuck all respect for different views, it’s time they were knocked off their high horse.
Leave a Reply