The British Monarchy

[mccity]

Do you think so?
Can you not see where he’s coming from?

At a surface level, sure. But if you've read the transcript that comes off as an interrogation, then you'd see the distinction between trying to find out someone's ethnic or national origin and what was seen in this specific incident

 

[Brewster's millions]

At a surface level, sure. But if you've read the transcript that comes off as an interrogation, then you'd see the distinction between trying to find out someone's ethnic or national origin and what was seen in this specific incident

Do you genuinely believe that transcript, word for word, and have 100% confidence in its accuracy?

The point is that the accuracy of the transcript and the nuance contained in it is critical to whether it was a bit of persistent questioning from a fairly blunt individual or a full on racial interrogation with something more sinister at play. For several reasons I can’t quite understand why its veracity isn’t being questioned a bit more rigorously given the media coverage afforded to it.

I may be wrong but I understand that no recording was made of the discussion, and if it was, you would have to question why somebody would be recording it in the first place. If no recording was made, then she would have to have an incredible memory to remember successive lines of questioning, the exact phrases used, the emphasis, persistence and so on.

That’s of course possible, but it’s typically unlikely that a person could remember a conversation and it’s various phases, emphasis etc - ie the bits that make for difficult reading - with such clarity. Other people nearby have corroborated the nature of the conversation but that’s different from ensuring 100% accuracy.

The other points are of course Fulani’s history of making numerous accusations of racism against the royal family and, significantly, the fact that she goes under a fake persona.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

How is it racist?

Persistent perhaps, but how can it be conceived as racist?

She was asking where her family originated, a question that many people encounter throughout life when it's obvious that they are 'different'.

So in future when I'm asked where I am from, should I now view it as a racist comment............or does that only apply if I was black?

Certainly just basic rudeness if not outright racism if you read the transcript. Worth bearing in mind that offence like beauty is very much in the eye of the beholder

 

[The perfect fumble]

It’s just a story that’s struck a chord because it taps into several others, there’s nothing “going on”.

We’re 3 days removed from one of the most famous politicians in the country publicly lamenting a loss of whiteness in the UK and 3 weeks from a man firebombing an asylum centre filled with mostly African and west Asian refugees.

The King’s son has left the country and royal family because he feels his wife was facing racial discrimination. People have been arguing about that for 5 years.

The monarchy is already in the spotlight, and has been since Andrew’s child rape came to light, but the Phillip and QE2 dying makes things feel less certain.

Confronting/avoiding the fallout of the empire is an ongoing national story. Windrush, BLM, pulling statues down etc.

And on top of all that, it fits perfectly into this ongoing “culture war” where certain people get angry because the world is changing around them and racism isn’t just when you scream racial slurs in someone’s face any more.



We must have had 50 pages of discussion and arguments on this thread about the story, so unless you think that discussion is also being manipulated and propagated as part of a bigger “something” the rest of the coverage in the news and social media is just reflecting that.

As for the speed of the coverage, I don’t know how long you want people to wait before writing opinion pieces but the day after a story breaks is pretty normal.

And there in lies the rub.

I see the world through the prism of class and if your post is anything to go by then you see it through the prism of race.

What should irritate me but doesn't, at least not now, is you are implying in your post and its precursor that I'm deliberately swerving the issue and in so doing I'm being disingenuous, using my "something up" as cover for what? Overt racism? that must be right because I'm quite deliberately using deflection tactics, isn't that how it works? Whataboutery as cover for prejudice? Subtle and not so subtle suggestions of sinister undercurrents in order to undermine something which is, as my dad used to say, "bleedin obvious".

Let's cut to the chase.

I've done my fair share of reading on the issues of critical race theory, political intersectionality, identity politics and so on, what I don't have is the lived experience of a black Briton in the UK, but I don't need that to recognise when something is spontaneous or not and this aftermath doesn't look spontaneous to me.

Oh, I've no doubt this conversation took place and I'm sure in all the essentials the account is accurate, but the aftermath has all the hallmarks of political opportunism, a narrative bolted onto something and rammed home with such force as to exclude the possibility of other interpretations, other than, of course, the Farage racist interpretation.

And I suppose that's what you're referring to when you talk about the media reflecting the story. Put crudely there's the story reflected in the Guardian and left wing social media and the story reflected by the likes of Farage and right wing social media.

Clearly I don't agree with how this story is reflected, by either side, I don't agree with Farage, the little englanders and the racists, but I also don't agree with much of critical race theory, or identity politics or the fallout of empire, at least not as you outlined.

Put simply this chance meeting, which was clearly not engineered, and played out as reported, offered the genuinely offended party an opportunity, an opportunity she would've been insane not to seize, what she's done for her cause should be applauded by all those who agree with her and admired by those that don't.

What Ngozi Fulani has brilliantly done is to steer the narrative, we're left in no doubt that this wasn't just a one off conversation with a bigot, she nipped that well and truly in the bud, no, this conversation is part of a much bigger picture with wider and deeper institutional implications and we know this because Ngozi and her companion have told us this in no uncertain terms and good for them. If you have an opportunity to get your message across, even in circumstances as bizarre as this you should take it, these windows of opportunity don't come along very often and you should seize them. I certainly would've done.

Oh, on a side note, I'm no fool, and I'm no bigot, but I am guilty of the crime of not agreeing with you, but as they say, other opinions are available, at least they used to say that.

 

[domalino]

Do you genuinely believe that transcript, word for word, and have 100% confidence in its accuracy?

It’s so fucking weird that you keep trying to suggest this transcript is a lie when all of the other people who heard the conversation have accepted it as an accurate retelling of events.

 

[domalino]

What should irritate me but doesn't, at least not now, is you are implying in your post and its precursor that I'm deliberately swerving the issue and in so doing I'm being disingenuous, using my "something up" as cover for what?

I’m not implying anything, I’m asking you to tell us what the “something” is that you keep saying is up with the story.

Are you really surprised that after saying “somethings up here” multiple times that you’ve been asked what it is?

I suppose you’re just about getting close to it with this essay, but you’ve still not really answered.

 

[Brewster's millions]

It’s so fucking weird that you keep trying to suggest this transcript is a lie when all of the other people who heard the conversation have accepted it as an accurate retelling of events.

I think you missed the point, maybe went over your head.

It’s the nuance of the conversation that matters, not whether she was asked where she came from, which people would be able to easily corroborate. And of course her being a phoney with an axe to grind.

 

[Bluesince1979]

I was on a job in chorlton last week, a very nice lady of asian decent. Im always interested in such things so i asked where her and her family were originally from.

She was very proud when she immediately told me that she is of Ugandan, bangladeshi, pakistani and indian decent and her parents moved over in the 60s. She was so enthusiastic in telling me about how lucky she is with learning very different cooking techniques and heritage from each grand parent. She asked of my decent and i told her very boringly its very english with a bit of welsh.

Should we have not had that conversation? Was i being racist? She certainly didnt think the question was , i dont think so anyway.
We were just chatting.

When someone is clearly of a different heritage to me are we not to have these chats anymore ?

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

I was on a job in chorlton last week, a very nice lady of asian decent. Im always interested in such things so i asked where her and her family were originally from.

She was very proud when she immediately told me that she is of Ugandan, bangladeshi, pakistani and indian decent and her parents moved over in the 60s. She was so enthusiastic in telling me about how lucky she is with learning very different cooking techniques and heritage from each grand parent. She asked of my decent and i told her very boringly its very english with a bit of welsh.

Should we have not had that conversation? Was i being racist? She certainly didnt think the question was , i dont think so anyway.
We were just chatting.

When someone is clearly of a different heritage to me are we not to have these chats anymore ?

Yes, but you'd obviously well judged the situation and built a rapport before going in with the question. I also suspect that if she'd have looked a bit pissed off and said she was from chorlton you'd have had the emotional intelligence to drop the subject and steer the conversation elsewhere.

 

[domalino]

I think you missed the point, maybe went over your head.

It’s the nuance of the conversation that matters, not whether she was asked where she came from, which people would be able to easily corroborate. And of course her being a phoney with an axe to grind.

The point is that you can’t accept the retelling of the event to be true.