DISCUSSION : HISTORY IN FOCUS

Read one of our previous articles from correspondents around the world:

 

Recent articles:
  Origins Of Terrorism
Why people resort to terrorism. Read >
  Sudan
Discover this country's problems. Read >

Think your friend might be interested in this article? Why not send them the link?
Send To A Friend

Racism

Martin Bulmer and John Solomos (eds).

A look at the development, and the current state of racist ideas and institutions



Late 19th: Black communities begin to grow up in cities such as Liverpool, Cardiff and Bristol.
More >

British Racism


What's The Story?

Because there has never been an apartheid principle in the United Kingdom, it is extremely difficult to quantify or in any way measure the onset or decline of racism within institutions, compared to other forms of discrimination. Sexism, for example, was for years endorsed by innumerable laws, and is far clearer territory. What is clear is that the 20th century brought with it a sweeping racial prejudice, and only from the 1960s onwards has it been possible for its victims to fight back.

The small black population in 18th century Britain largely disappeared through intermarriage and death, and there was no significant black population again until the end of the 19th century, when communities grew in Liverpool, Cardiff and Bristol. There was nothing to prevent open discrimination of any of them – it was perfectly lawful. Any doubts on this score were quashed by the government’s 1935 Coloured Seamen’s Order, which effectively prevented all black seamen from finding employment by forcing them to register as aliens.

The first breakthrough wasn’t to be until the 1940s. Learie Constantine was a cricketer from the West Indies whose skills made him a respected figure in Britain, and in turn led to a position in the Ministry of Labour. But it wasn’t his induction into politics that threw up problems. In 1941 he booked two rooms at the Imperial Hotel, Russell Square, informing the booking clerk that he was black. Upon arriving with his wife and daughter, he was told by the manager, “You can stay here tonight, but not any longer.” He subsequently won an action for breach of contract, and was awarded damages of £5 by Justice Birkett, who remarked that the hotel’s evidence was “grossly insulting and unworthy of credence”. However, the issue of the case was breach of contract, not race discrimination, so it led to no wide-spread change either in society, government, or the hotel trade.

At much the same time, a new piece of racist legislation was introduced to the military. It had always recruited from the Caribbean islands, and so the number of non-white soldiers swelled until World War II. However, concerns began to be voiced; there were furtive mutterings that it might all “get out of control”. So in successive acts, passed until the end of the 1950s, there was a specific reference to a two per cent maximum quota of non-Caucasians allowed in regiments.

Post-war Immigration

By the end of the 1950s, post-war immigration was reaching its height, race riots raged through the country, and bigotry swelled to new proportions. In this climate occurred a chilling precursor of the Stephen Lawrence case. On May 17th, 1959, Kelso Cochrane, an Antiguan, was attacked by six white youths, and died from a knife wound. There was no shortage of witnesses, and several suspects were held overnight, but none was charged. In the fall-out, the Inter-Racial Friendship Co-Ordinating Council beseeched the Home Office, asking for police protection, and an end to police bias. The Home Office responded with a glib assurance that the police bore no culpability for the investigation’s failure to arrest any suspects. Any suggestion of an enquiry on the scale of the Macpherson report would have been greeted with incredulity.

Police bias was by no means only directed at civilians. In 1967, Norwell Roberts became London’s first black police officer, after graduating from police training college on the same day as Sir Paul Condon. His story paints a disturbing picture of life on the force. Cups of tea were thrown in his face, his tyres were slashed on a daily basis, and his uniform was defiled whenever it was unattended. Upon retiring in the mid-90s, he said that had he known what to expect, he would never have joined.

Parliament’s history is no less chequered. Britain’s first non-Caucasian MP was an Indian immigrant who won a Liberal Democrat seat in the 1880s. But this, and subsequent examples, were exceptional circumstances – the MPs in question were already established successes in other countries. In fact, parliament has proved the institution most resilient to the entry attempts of non-whites. In the February 1974 elections, neither the Conservatives, nor the Labour Party, fielded any ethnic candidates, and the total number of candidates across the remaining parties was six. Not one got a seat. 1987 saw the first genuine (though tiny) influx, when Diane Abbot and Bernie Grant won seats, and following the 1997 election, there are now nine ethnic minority MPs, all in the Labour Party.

Armed Forces

Meanwhile, the Armed Forces report an ethnic contingent of two per cent (ethnic minorities make up six per cent of the general population). Armed Forces Minister Dough Henderson said on March 16, “We have made very clear our policy on zero tolerance to racism in the Armed Forces. Our priority is for the development of an organisational culture which welcomes racial diversity. Our policies are designed to ensure that racism is eliminated.”

While it would be foolish to believe that all three institutions will eliminate racism, anymore than the population at large will, the very fact that this is their avowed goal reflects a shift in society. More and more institutions are confronting their racist pasts, and challenging any racism still within their structures. Enoch Powell’s hysterical, apocalyptic vision of a Britain in which “natives” would be overwhelmed by immigrants and come to feel foreigners in their own land, has not materialised.

As for the charge of institutionalised racism levelled in the Macpherson Report, it was answered by Sir Paul Condon with the following riposte: “Definitions which suggest that most police officers are racist most of the time, do no justice to the working lives and courage and integrity of police officers. Simplistic and pejorative labelling, which obscures complex truth, will not inspire, and we must inspire”.